wd Tetbe ow tee
ea
.
se
e
Sade deteee
ieee of a 2 eenetee teee”
of calm deliberation" (p. 13).
rIMOn A
The intent here is clearly not to
out of proper proportion the stark estimates of post-attack chaos, but rather
to present such estimates in a manner that will achieve both the ero result of knowledge and understanding of weapons effects, and a bal eed back-
ground for the discussion of other national security issues.
{+
In order to present a more concrete outline of the mecommpnded sub-
Panel's
discussion, which suggests that something like the following range of topics
ject matter for discussion, we have consulted the transcript of th
was intended:
a. The basic rights and freedoms that are a part of our hational
heritage;
b.
The risks to those rights and freedoms posed by the Spviet pro-
gram;
ec. The role of foreign aid, alliances, diplomatic negotiptions and
the maintenance of a strong military and civil defense posturp as elements of a national bulwark against the threat;
dad.
The disarmament effort in its true, safeguarded perspective;
e. The strengths and weaknesses cf the United Nations ag a force
for peace, as well as
f.
The effects of nuclear weapons and the effectiveness (and limit
of effectiveness ) of various countermeasures available to the individual.
8.
The Panel expresses the belief that the program would befrore success-
ful if the President and other leaders in the Federal Government
ere to lend
their weight to the stimulation of such group discussions. It is suggested
further that all informational media elements be enlisted in the ¢ ducational
effort. These are, however, suggestions from the Panel which are certainly
susceptible to critical judgment, depending on the amount of emphs sis desired.
If there are good reasons for a lesser emphasis, such a course wor ‘ld not null.
ify the value of the basic recommendation--that group discussion 4 echniques
be employed to involve people in these important issues.
Recommendations
9.
After further study of the matter, as requested in NSC ee
No. 1665-b, I have satisfied myself that the basic reasoning of t e Panel is
sound, and that the central idea of involvement by group discussit yn suggested
by the Panel is sound, and should be encouraged. For a variety offr reasons IL
believe that:
a. The discussions should be broad in scope, with the rpsor part of
the discussions being devoted to national security issues o t er than
nuclear weapons effects, as outlined in paragraph 7 above.
~5-
TOP SECRET
7
ais om omen
mor
ate21 bie ot
| toPSECRET