Authors: Carol Rutz
Tags: #Law, #Constitutional Law, #Human Rights, #Politics & Social Sciences, #Politics & Government, #Specific Topics, #Intelligence & Espionage
26. TSD has found that TDY visits of MKULTRA officers to the field in support of specific operations increases the awareness of the MKDELTA capability and stimulates proposals for additional projects. Of equal significance, however, has been the TSD decision in 1961 to station in the xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx officer who is informed on MKDELTA matters. A second officer is scheduled to move PCS to xxxxxxx during the summer of 1963 to support xx and adjacent stations. While the principal responsibility of these officers lies in the field xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx the arrangement in the xxxxxxxxx has proved useful in the MKDELTA field -- notably in interrogation -- as well. It now appears that increased reliance can be placed on this approach to promoting responsible use of the MKDELTA capabilities.
27. Negative attitudes toward the use of MKDELTA materials; problems in the training of case officers in this field:
The Gottlieb report observed that some case officers have basic moral objections to the concept of MKDELTA and therefore refuse to use the materials. Some senior officers were reported to believe that the
proper employment of the capability required more sophistication than most case officers possessed and that there would be a tendency toward over-reliance on and misuse of drugs in lieu of perfecting classic espionage techniques. Finally, it was suggested that MKDELTA controls were so restrictive as to have generated a general defeatism among case officers concerning the chances of getting approval for the use of materials in routine rather than extreme situations. These matters will be reviewed in future field inspections of DD/P area divisions. In the meanwhile, the stationing of qualified TSD consultants in the field and increasing operational experience will tend to develop over time a category of case officers who have acquired direct appreciation of the potential and limitations of MKDELTA capability.
28. The risk of stimulating increase use of MKDELTA materials by opposition intelligence services:
The Gottlieb report stated that opposition intelligence services are active in the MKDELTA field and recommended that the CI Staff of the DD/P conduct a systematic study of the evidence. This recommendation has not been implemented. It is a subject of increasing significance as new materials and techniques become available.
It is recommended that:
Deputy Director/Plans instruct Chief, CI Staff, to perform a study of the evidence of the use of MKDELTA materials by opposition intelligence services and recommend appropriate measures for training DD/P case officers to recognize and counter hostile activity in this area.
29. In summary, present evidence concerning the operational value of MKDELTA capability would appear to confirm the principal judgments of the 1960 Gottlieb report. There is an extremely low rate of operational use of the controlled materials. On the other hand, significant progress has been achieved in the development of an interrogation theory employing chemical substances, and in providing competent guidance to the field in MKDELTA matters through TSD officers working overseas.
Management of MKULTRA
30. TSD has initiated 144 projects relating to the control of human behavior; i.e., xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx during the ten years of operation of the MKULTRA program. Twenty-five (25) of these projects remain in existence at the present time, while a number of others are in various stages of termination.
31. Active projects may be groups under the following arbitrary headings. Many projects involve activity in two or more of the areas listed.
a. basic research in materials and processes
b. procurement of research materials
c. testing of substances on animals and human beings
d. development of delivery techniques
e. projects in offensive/defensive BW, CW, and radiation
f. miscellaneous projects; e.g., (1) petroleum sabotage, (2) defoliants, (3) devices for remote measurement of physiological processes
32. The current management of TSD has initiated a policy of directing the activities of MKULTRA and of the Behavioral Activities Branch towards operations and away from long-range research. Prior to this change in policy which occurred in 1962, MKULTRA sponsored a large number of projects in the fields of applied psychology, sociology, anthropology, and graphology. The present management is unlikely to return to these fields of research under the MKULTRA charter. The inspectors concluded that many of these projects were of insufficient sensitivity to justify waiver of normal Agency control procedures. It is recommended at the end of this report that projects falling outside the authorized scope of MKULTRA henceforth require the prior written approval of the DD/P to qualify for MKULTRA processing.
33. The TSD chain of command for administration of the MKULTRA program comprises the following:
a. Chief, TSD providing overall management
b. Deputy Chief, TSD, (a trained scientist) providing top substantive guidance for the MKULTRA program
c. Assistant Chief, TSD, for Research and Development, contributing management but not substantive guidance
d. Chief Scientist (reporting to c., above), (a trained scientist), contributing substantive guidance in some areas and responsible for the technical administrative processes of MKULTRA. He is supported by a GS-12 budget officer.
e. program manager for MKULTRA, also serves as Chief of Biology Branch, (a trained scientist)
f. project monitors located in various branches of TSD and specialized in the subject fields of the specific projects for which they are assigned responsibility
To date this chain of command has relied primarily on oral communications in the management of MKULTRA. Files are notably incomplete, poorly organized, and lacking in evaluative statements that might give perspective to management policies over time. A substantial portion of the MKULTRA record appears to rest in the memories of the principal officers and is therefore almost certain to be lost with their departures. The senior officers in the MKULTRA chain of command who are not substantively qualified need better records to measure the validity of projects through time and to identify key area in which to require detailed periodic briefings from working specialists.
34. It will be noted that the Chief of Support, TSD, does not participate in the MKULTRA administration. The predecessor of the present Chief of Support served in TSD throughout the life of the program until 1962 without ever being associated with the management. In his stead, the Chief Scientist and a GS-12 budget officer have provided administrative support. The Chief Scientist has set policy on the funding of MKULTRA projects in all respects including salaries, overhead rates, fees, material, equipment, facilities, travel and the like. The support officer was only added in 1962 under pressure of critical audit findings. This use of the Chief Scientist in a field where Chief of Support possesses superior qualifications and facilities constitutes a misuse of talent. The proposed new charter for MKULTRA should take account of this anomaly and also provide that Chief of Support advise in the future on decisions to fund projects under the MKULTRA authority and thereby to waive the application of DD/S procedures.
It is recommended that:
Deputy Director/Plans draft and submit for the approval of the Director of Central Intelligence a revision and re-confirmation of the authority granted him in 1953 (Tab A) to operate the MKULTRA program, incorporating the following provisions:
a. Deputy Director/Plans assign Chief, Technical Services Division, to operate MKULTRA as a program for research and development of chemical, biological, and radioactive materials, and of techniques for the employment of electro-shock, capable of producing human behavioral or physiological change. Subsequent changes in scope of MKULTRA shall require the written approval of the Deputy Director/Plans.
b. Deputy Director/Plans arrange with Deputy Director/Research for the coordination of research relating to MKULTRA objectives to control duplication of effort and to provide for exchange of information of new capabilities.
c. Chief, Technical Services Division, consistent with established policy, may negotiate for research in MKULTRA materials and techniques to be conducted by Deputy Director/Research and by other component offices of CIA. He shall consult regularly with the appropriate officers of such components to control duplication of effort.
d. Chief, Technical Services Division shall approve the addition of MKULTRA developed materials to the list of operationally available MKDELTA substances and keep the Deputy Director/Plans advised of such additions. (cf. Clandestine Services Instruction No. 220-10, MKDELTA MATERIALS, dated 22 July 1960 -- Tab B -- which governs the employment of behavioral control materials in clandestine operations.)
e. Deputy Director/Plans, jointly with Deputy Director/Support, establish policy for the administration of support functions under MKULTRA. Such policy shall seek to limit the maximum waiver of established Agency support procedures for activities of unusual sensitivity.
f. Chief, Technical Services Division shall maintain exacting internal controls and records of all substantive and support matters within each MKULTRA project. Records shall include:
(1) A plan of the research and development to be performed.
(2) An administrative annex setting forth security, budget and accounting arrangements agreed to by the parties of the project. Chief of Support, TSD, shall then certify to the DD/S for each such project that this annex is in accord with the agreed DDS/DDP policy. Pursuant to this responsibility, Chief of Support, TSD, shall have right of unlimited access to the substantive and administrative records of MKULTRA.
(3) An annual written review by the project monitor setting forth in reasonable detail the nature of the work performed, the prospects for results of eventual operational significance, and a recommendation for continuance or termination of the project.
g. Testing of MKULTRA materials and devices shall only be performed in accredited research institutions under accepted scientific procedures.
h. Chief, Technical Services Division, shall brief the Deputy Director/Plans at least semi-annually on MKULTRA activities. The Deputy Director/Plans after each briefing shall promptly notify the Deputy Director of Central Intelligence that he has personally conducted a semi-annual review of the program.
i. The MKULTRA program be audited in accordance with the provisions of HR 31-1, including auditor access to substantive as well as administrative records.
Mori ID 17749
29 November 1963
MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD
SUBJECT: MKULTRA PROGRAM
1. A meeting was held in General Carter’s office on 29 November 1963 to discuss the subject program. Those present, in addition to General Carter, were Messrs. Helms, Kirkpatrick, xxxxxxxx, Gottlieb and Earman. The main thrust of the discussion was the testing of certain drugs on unwitting U.S. citizens. Dr. Gottlieb gave a brief history of the MKULTRA program which was not in any way at variance with the IG report of August 1963 on this subject.
2. Messrs. Gottlieb and xxxxxxxx argued for the continuation of unwitting testing, using as the principal point that controlled testing cannot be depended upon for accurate results. General Carter, Mr. Kirkpatrick, and I do not disagree with this point. We also accept the necessity for having a “stable of drugs” on the shelf and the requirement for continued research and development of drugs -- not only for possible operational use but also to give CIA insight on the state of the art in this field and in particular to alert us to what the opposition is or might be expected to do in the R&D and employment of drugs.
3. xxxxxxxxxx noted that there was no disagreement with the recommendations of the IG survey on MKULTRA with the exception of the unwitting testing problem. In response to a query from General Carter, he stated that since the IG report such testing has been held in abeyance.
4. General Carter made it clear that he understood the necessity for research and development of all types of drugs, to include their testing. However, he was troubled by the “unwitting aspect” This led to a brief discussion on the possibility of unwitting tests on foreign nationals, but according to xxxxxxxx this had been ruled out as a result of several conversations he recently had with senior chiefs of stations -- too dangerous and the lack of controlled facilities. (This seemed an odd conclusion to me since the same dangers exist in the U.S. and from what we were able to find out during our survey, the facilities we have for uncontrolled testing leave much to be desired -- I made a point of this.)
5. After further discussion, it was agreed:
That the charter of MKULTRA would be revised along the lines recommended in the IG Survey.
The procedures for testing drugs are to be reviewed and new alternative proposals submitted.
c. If it is concluded by the DD/P that unwitting testing on American citizens must be continued to operationally prove out these drugs, it may become necessary to place this problem before the Director for a decision.
6. I made the point that the IG survey had found other problems with the MKULTRA program in addition to the unwitting testing, but stated if the charter is rewritten along the lines recommended, I believe these problems would be corrected.