Documents / FOIA release
This Top Secret study by the Interdepartmental Coordinating Group on Germany and Berlin, dated July 12, 1961, and released by the Central Intelligence Agency, answers NSC Directive No. 58 of June 30, 1961. It sets out courses of action for the Berlin crisis but does not judge their merits. It covers imminent presidential decisions, a three-phase timetable running to January 1, military preparations and mobilization, covert action, economic sanctions, public information, negotiating positions and checkpoint procedures for East German personnel.
“Pacific Ocean”2 pages
Read from the scan by GLM-OCR; expect the odd misread word.
## TOP SECRET 3. International Law has recognized two kinds of naval blockades--belligerent and pacific. a. A belligerent blockade, which applies to all shipping to and from the blockaded country, including neutrals, is universally recognized as an act of war against the blockaded country, even though the blockade is employed simply to deprive that country of intercourse with the outside world without military operations ashore. Absent a state of war between the United States and the Soviets or GDR, there can legally be no right to assert a belligerent blockade. Further, any attempt to do so would itself constitute in International Law an act of war thereby involving the United States in all the consequences of armed aggression. b. Traditionally, a pacific blockade is undertaken for purposes of obtaining reparations or to put an end to some disturbance. As summarized by Hackworth, this type of blockade for reprisal is "regarded as an act short of war by which one State undertakes to blockade the ports of another State for the purpose of compelling the latter to make amends or reparation for some injustice claimed to have been caused by the blockaded State." An important incident of such a blockade is that the State imposing the blockade may lawfully seize only vessels of the blockaded State and may not interfere with vessels of third countries except for the purpose of identification. Historically, only the great European powers have resorted to pacific blockades (Britain and France thirteen times each) and in each case this device was used against weak countries which did not possess fleets of consequence. c. Any attempt to impose a pacific blockade upon the Soviet Union would undoubtedly provoke retaliation of some kind which might well lead to general war. But apart from this practical consideration, the legality of the use of pacific blockades is now subject to serious doubt in view of our post-World War II commitments under the United Nations Charter. Article 2 requires all members to settle their international disputes by means which do not endanger peace and security. Paragraph 4 of Article 2 provides specifically that "All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state." It cannot authoritatively be stated that pacific blockades would be construed to be within the prohibition of Article 2 of the United Nations Charter, but it would seem that resort to this device is now proscribed on the ground that it more properly partakes of the nature of "force" rather than "peaceful means".
Not linked to a story yet.
FOIA release, from the cia-readingroom collection. The PDF is mirrored here; the original link is above. The text was read from the page images by GLM-OCR; expect the odd misread word. 163 pages are in the text index: search them above, or from the library's search.