COURTING A RELUCTANT ALLY - National Intelligence University

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Chapter 3U.S.-UK RELATIONS, 1935-1939:THE BEGINNINGS OF A STRATEGIC RAPPROACHMENT[O]bviously there is no political possibility here of “an agreement in contractualform” with Great Britain in the Orient. Whatever the euphemismthis would in effect constitute an alliance.The Secretary of State to the Ambassadorin Great Britain (Bingham), 29 June 1934,in Foreign Relations of the United States 1934[British Prime Minister] MacDonald: We are interested in the political situationin the Pacific which imposes certain risks on us that we did not haveat the time of the London Treaty [of 1930] and we had hoped would notoccur; we hoped that our cooperation with you would prevent it. But it didnot work out that way.Minutes of Meeting Between British and AmericanDelegations in the Prime Minister’s Office at theHouse of Commons, 14 November 1934,in Foreign Relations of the United States 1934Even as tensions continued between the U.S. and Great Britain during theinterwar period, common interests also remained in place. As World War IIdrew closer, these interests would eventually overshadow the differencesbetween the two countries and unite them in a common effort. Two areas ofconcern to the British and Americans were 1) countering the growing threatposed by Japan and 2) maintaining the naval ratios established in the WashingtonNaval Treaty of 1921 and the London Naval Treaty of 1930. It is, therefore,not surprising that during the 1920s and early 1930s, exchanges of intelligenceand technical information on these issues did occur. For the most part, however,these were conducted at a low level and concerned routine matters. The eventssurrounding the abortive London Naval Conference of 1935, which was notheld due to a decision by Japan to abrogate its naval treaty commitments, demonstratedto the U.S. and Great Britain that their strategic concerns were growingincreasingly closer. As the situation in the Far East and Europe began todeteriorate, the British began to look to U.S. support as the most viable means25
of shoring up their strategic weaknesses. 83 By early 1938, secret talks betweenthe world’s two most powerful navies, conducted with the full approval of theirrespective governments, signaled the beginning of a series of intelligence cooperationand information exchange initiatives by the British to secure U.S. assistancein accomplishing their strategic objectives.Precursor <strong>Intelligence</strong> Exchanges in The Interwar Period: 1920-1935As he looked back on the early 1920s, Rear Admiral Royal Ingersoll, whoplayed a pivotal role in the establishment of closer relations between the U.S.and British navies in 1938, remembered that relations with the British weregenerally cordial, although he could not recall specific details of any intelligenceexchanges with the British during his time at ONI. 84 Another observer,Alan Harris Bath, a former Naval intelligence officer and the author of Trackingthe Axis Enemy, finds that most of the cooperation during this period “consistedmainly of low-level operational exchanges carried out informally by Americanor British naval officers in the fleet or by naval attachés on foreign station.”85 Although there are indications of at least one formal meeting betweenrepresentatives of the two navies in 1928 to discuss views on the Far East situationand the potential for cooperation, the present author’s review of archivaldata supports Bath’s assessment. 86 For example, information requests from theU.S. naval attaché in London to the NID show that the information exchangesbetween the two countries were very routine during this period. They includedrequests for information on such things as British naval pay scales, informationon the pilots and equipment of the British “Fleet Air Arm,” lists of shipsremoved from the Royal Navy active roster, lists of Royal Navy ships laiddown and undergoing modernization, the practice and use of wireless telegraphy(W/T), information on W/T technology, coatings used for aircraft carrierdecks, and deep-sea diving technology. In almost every case, these requests forinformation were framed as a “quid pro quo,” with the U.S. naval attaché offeringto provide similar information to the NID, if the NID honored the attaché’s83Lawrence Pratt, “Anglo-American Naval Conversations,” International Affairs 47 (October1972): 749, 754-758; Bath, 11-12; Coles, 114; Aldrich, 116, 122-124; Charmley, 58.84Ingersoll Reminiscences, 47. RADM Ingersoll worked the ONI Japan desk from 1921 to1924.85Bath, 10.86Dorwart, Conflict of Duty, 140; Bath, 10.26
Page 1 and 2: COURTING A RELUCTANT ALLYAn Evaluat
Page 4: The Joint Military Intelligence Col
Page 8 and 9: FOREWORDTo most Americans alive tod
Page 10 and 11: PROLOGUESince World War II, the Uni
Page 12 and 13: Chapter 1THE STATUS OF INTELLIGENCE
Page 14 and 15: action, a propaganda unit, or an ec
Page 16 and 17: officers assisted by 20 civilian cl
Page 18 and 19: ships in violation of treaty limits
Page 20 and 21: assessments. By 1941, ONI was releg
Page 22 and 23: might bear on their work.” 39 As
Page 24 and 25: ility over time, its operational in
Page 26 and 27: Chapter 2U.S.-UK RELATIONS, 1914-19
Page 28 and 29: told by the Chief of Naval Operatio
Page 30 and 31: ups of the early 20th century. 65 T
Page 32 and 33: firmly believed that British polici
Page 34: ecame one of the primary sources of
Page 39 and 40: mon framework for negotiation with
Page 43 and 44: assuaged British concerns about the
Page 45 and 46: In the area of intelligence exchang
Page 47 and 48: clear to the Americans that if they
Page 49 and 50: in his mind worked against closer c
Page 51 and 52: praised the fighting spirit of the
Page 53 and 54: through November of 1940 persuaded
Page 55 and 56: and Great Britain. His principalcon
Page 57 and 58: eceived by the British and from the
Page 59 and 60: gear designed by the British. Altho
Page 61 and 62: American Attitudes On Intelligence
Page 63 and 64: information did have an impact on K
Page 65 and 66: the affair. 183 This lack of resent
Page 67 and 68: tion exchanges. Even more significa
Page 69 and 70: nation (BSC) mission, is now availa
Page 71 and 72: good will and encouraged greater co
Page 73 and 74: would merely show Donovan “the be
Page 75 and 76: Lothian passed Hill’s proposal to
Page 77 and 78: still a powerful influence. While Z
Page 79 and 80: Since the Tizard Mission had only a
Page 81 and 82: appropriating large increases to th
Page 83 and 84: the French, a point which would not
Page 85 and 86:
equested that RADM Ghormley remain
Page 87 and 88:
when he [Pott] comes to O.N.I. he i
Page 89 and 90:
it was not official U.S. policy. St
Page 91 and 92:
efforts that had begun with the Sta
Page 93 and 94:
high-level ABC-1 staff talks which
Page 95 and 96:
to successfully interpret the instr
Page 97 and 98:
to little more than a nebulous stat
Page 99 and 100:
to offer.” 319 Others in the Brit
Page 101 and 102:
Operational Intelligence Cooperatio
Page 103 and 104:
Godfrey’s main concern was most l
Page 105 and 106:
possesses complementary capabilitie
Page 107 and 108:
2. Be prepared to give something of
Page 109 and 110:
had in forming its own Joint Intell
Page 112 and 113:
GLOSSARYABC-1ALUSNALondonBGENBSCCAP
Page 114 and 115:
APPENDIX AA NOTE ON SOURCESArchival
Page 116:
APPENDIX BMAJOR EVENTS IN U.S.-UK I
Page 119 and 120:
________. Foreign Relations of the
Page 121 and 122:
________. “The Secret of the Chur
Page 123 and 124:
Zacharias, Ellis M., CAPT, USN. Sec
Page 126 and 127:
INDEXAABC-1 Talks 41, 57, 74-75, 78
Page 128 and 129:
IImagery Intelligence (IMINT) 12, 8
Page 130 and 131:
Signals Intelligence(SIGINT) 2-3, 7
Page 132:
PCN 53512ISBN 0-9656195-9-1
show all

COURTING A RELUCTANT ALLY - National Intelligence University

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?