Appendix A:

Exchange of Letters with Department
of Defense, 1971

These letters contradict the statement made by William J. Casey, Director of Central Intelligence Agency, that in 1985 the Administration had only "recently" learned of the impact of our technology on the Soviet armaments industry. Washington was alerted 15 years ago.

                            September 15, 1971

Dr. N.F. Wikner
Special Assistant for Threat Assessment
Director of Defense Research and Engineering
Department of Defense
The Pentagon
Washington D.C. 20301

Dear Dr. Wikner:

I am in receipt of a letter from the office of the Director of Defense Research and Engineering (signed Eberhardt Rechtin) in regard to an inquiry made by me to the Secretary concerning technical information for a projected book WESTERN TECHNOLOGY AND THE SOVIET ARMAMENTS INDUSTRY.

In response to this letter, which suggests that I should contact you, I enclose:

a. a list of the information desired

b. a very approximate and preliminary outline of the structure of the book.

I shall, of course be more than happy to clarify any points that may arise in consideration of my request.

With best wishes,

                            Very sincerely,
                            Antony C. Sutton
                            Research Fellow


Details of Information Requested
The information required is as follows:

a) Detailed technical and engineering data on Soviet weapons systems from 1945 to date, in the form of technical handbooks or reports (maintenance or servicing handbooks are adequate but less valuable). In Russian or English with diagrammatic layouts, cutaways, technical specifications of materials used and metallurgical analyses.

These are needed for the production models in each weapons series from 1945 to date. For example, MEDIUM TANKS: data is needed on the T 34, T 54 and T 62; but data is not needed on development models, such as T 44 or variants of main production models such as T 34/76B (a turret variant of the main production model T 34).

The weapons spectrum for which this range of data is required are the production models of: tanks (heavy, medium and light), armored cars, self propelled guns, trucks and tractors, guns of all types (from tank guns down to hand guns), ammunition, planes, naval craft, rocket launchers, missiles. In other words the standard models in the broad weapons spectrum.

I am not interested in the more esoteric weapons under development (such as lasers), or weapons developed and abandoned, but only those systems which constitute (or have historically constituted) the main threat to the Free World.

b) A detailed listing of the inputs required to manufacture each of the above Soviet weapons including if possible the chemical or physical specifications of material inputs, quantities of inputs per weapon, and model numbers and types of equipment.

Categories (a) and (b) are required in order to determine how Soviet weapons are manufactured and what material inputs are used.

c) Reports or raw data on the use by the Soviets of Western technology in weapons systems and general military production Equipment rosters of Soviet armament plants, i.e. their machinery inventories, (these will identify use of Western machines).

d) Reports or raw data on Soviet manufacture of propellants, explosives, military clothing and instrumentation and computers; the process used, outputs, names of plants.

For example: I would like to know the types of explosives produced by the Soviets and either the chemical anlysis or sufficient information to determine an approximate analysis. I am not interested in the military aspects i.e. the explosive force or characteristics of the explosion, only what is being produced and how it is being produced.

e) Material on the conversion of a civilian industrial base to a military base; the U.S. experience in World War II and Korea; the problems of conversion, time required, adaptability of a civilian plant to military output.

f) Details of the important Export Control cases (both under the Export Control Act and CoCom in Paris) where DOD has argued against export of technology or equipment items to the Soviet Union or to other countries where there was a possibility of transfer to the USSR. These would include for example, the Transfermatic Case of 1961 and the Ball Bearings case of about the same date. From the mid 1950's down to the present time.

g) Equipment lists (by model number, not necessarily quantities) of North Viet and Viet Cong forces.

In general I am not interested in the quantitative aspects (i.e. how many they have of a particular weapon) nor in military characteristics (i.e. ballistic properties, operating characteristics etc.).

On the other hand I am interested in qualitative aspects, particularly knowing how weapons are produced and the material and equipment inputs used to produce these weapons. Whether the weapons and materials produced are militarily or economically efficient is of little concern for this study.

                            February 18, 1972



Dr. N.F. Wikner
Special Assistant for Threat Assessment
Director of Defense Research and Engineering
Washington D.C. 20301

Dear Dr. Wikner:

This refers to my letter of September 15, 1971 concerning my request for technical information on the transfer of technology to the Soviet Union.

My understanding is that the Department has a suitable data base and that according to Mr. Eberhardt Rechtin's letter of September 9: "there is a systematic and continuous effort to declassify all pertinent information."

Accordingly I submitted with my letter a detailed statement of the information desired.

In the absence of any reply or acknowledgement from the Department in the elapsed five months, would it now be accurate for me to assume that there is no desire to pursue the question further?

                            Antony C. Sutton