Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
1553352
label
January 28, 1976 - Ford, Scowcroft, ACDA Director Fred Ikle
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
1553352
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
January 28, 1976 - Ford, Scowcroft, ACDA Director Fred Ikle
citationUrl
collections
Memoranda of Conversations (Nixon and Ford Administrations)
Ford Administration Memoranda of Conversations
subjects
Arms control
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
1553352
coverageEndDate
day
28
logicalDate
1976-01-28
month
1
year
1976
coverageStartDate
day
28
logicalDate
1976-01-28
month
1
year
1976
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
286ce60d57bd941e
ocrText
File scanned from the National Security Adviser's Memoranda of Conversation Collection at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
Ed
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
SEGRET/NODIS/XGDS
MEMORANDUM OF CONVERSATION
PARTICIPANTS:
President Ford
Dr. Fred C. Ikle, Director, U.S. Arms
Control and Disarmament Agency
Brent Scowcroft, Assistant to the President
for National Security Affairs
DATE AND TIME:
Wednesday, January 28, 1976
2:18 - 2:50 p.m.
PLACE:
The Oval Office
President: How have you been?
Ikle: Busy, as it should be.
President: We got some encouraging news from Henry's trip, certainly
better than we had before. What do you think?
Ikle: We have analyzed it. I am seriously concerned. We are heading
in a direction which could be disastrous. It could destroy the symmetry
achieved at Vladivostok by eliminating Backfire and restricting cruise
missiles to 370 miles. I think it would severely restrict our future
negotiations on tactical systems. We don't want a Backfire-type bomber.
for bargaining.
DECLASSIFIED
E.O. 12958, SEC. 3.5
NSC MEMO, 11/24/98, STATE DEPT. GUIDELINES
NARA, DATE 6/2/04
I don't know whether cruise missiles are good or not, but they are good
It will have a bad impact on our allies and the Chinese. The Soviets
will have thousands of IRBMs and Backfires and we have no counter-
weight in our allies view.
Then there is the verification issue and its impact on SALT II and
the future.
BY
SEGRET/NODIS/XGDS
CLASSIFIED BY BRENT SCOWCROFT
EXEMPT FROM GENERAL DECLASSIFICATION
SCHEDULE OF EXECUTIVE ORDER 11652
EXEMPTION CATEGORY 5 (b) (1,3)
AUTOMATICALLY DECLASSIFIED ON Imp. to det.
SEGRET/NODIS/XGDS
2.
The Soviets have IRBMs and cruise missiles. How do we handle
these?
This is a pessimistic analysis, but there are ways out. We can
verify on intercontinental cruise missiles because of their volume, and
reassure the Soviets on that point.
On the others, we have to have limitations which are self-
balancing. Some of this may require going back on what we have
offered in the negotiation. But the Soviets tend to take out the raisins
and leave the cake.
President: So do we. These are complex issues. There is one thing
which concerns me. What are our alternatives? Will we get the
programs through the Congress?
Ikle: I don't think we can let Backfire run free with its capability while
there are restrictions on systems which are tactical and can hardly hit
the USSR.
Scowcroft: You would be in a position then of arguing no SALT agree-
ment, because they wouldn't let cruise missiles run free.
Ikle: We could maybe offer not to test or build cruise missiles unless
Backfire numbers go above a certain point.
Scowcroft: That is possible.
President: Don't forget what we got which is good -- penetration for
B-52s, heavy missile definition, MIRV verification, etc.
Ikle: Yes. I think we just have to make sure we don't give up things
which we can trade.
President: I keep coming back to the fact of our alternatives and that
I think a good SALT agreement is in our interest. You have a full input
into the system and we will have an NSC meeting next week. I am
intrigued with the idea we could go through research and development
on intercontinental cruise missiles to protedt our options there.
Ikle: That would protect us against a breakout.
SECRET/NODIS/XGDS
P/ Ikle
28 Jan 76 2:15 pm
P Home have you have
I Bray of it should be
P we jot some encouning have from I trip,
certify better them we habinfore what
--- Repreting
I We line usedy qed it. a servicity conserved
& heading in christin which Q overd he troostmen
It would distroy separaty a briened at VIId
by eleventing Be hpirt int. eatienty
CMs to 370 use Ithik it emil awarth
reghnit are are future exgot on tac.
spttus. We don't wont a Infire his
houber Don't benner whenher exa a are geral
02 not but good for borgering
Bad report on an allow PRC. School
hour cooos of IRBM's & hpries Y we brue
her conteringht in our alhis envires
Then there is c issue & its vaga A
on SwitI & puture
Sors have IRBM'S & ams. Howelo not harill
that?
This is provimotic analysis, but and
We can inw ICCNI'S - became of
X respone Serso on charact.
On others, me have to have limitations
which one silf Calancin. Sam & this
my require going be he on what one have
offered in c regot, hant c. foro tend to tabe
and c earding & leanic caber.
P. So dr we. these and engelex issues. There is
and thing artich buckes me. what aream
alternative? will and get C programs them
C Coung.
FORD
?
DECLASSIFIED
GEPALD
E.O. 12958, SEC. 3.5
NSC MEMO, 11/24/98, STATE DEPT. GUIDELINES
BY lohn
NARA DATE 6/7/04
I Idvent think we can let BaRfire un free
w/its cap. while there one instruction
on systems who in and can hardly
tact icaly (per Der sp
hitc USSR.
5
7 would he in a Desetion them of anging
wo salt agreement hesped thry
ht CNI; the free
I we canld mayber offer with ust or bried
cm's makes Ber hfire #'s go to abria
certain paint.
S That possible
P
Don't in get what he got whih is good. -
penetition for B-52's, brown initial of
MIRV its,
I Yes. I think and just have T make new
we dnit give rp charp which are can
a
P
I buy coming be h to for that of am
alternations and that & Think a good
Sart agreement is in one intert.
You have eet, fill begat into C segation
ml 1 will have and S C met murk.
dan interigual w/ in me end TO then
R+ ctoa KT ICCM to printict am options
the
I That world protect us against ce breakment.
FORD
GERALD
LIBRARY