Skip to content

Did the CIA Change its Procedure for Reviewing Historical Records? FRINFORMSUM 1/17/2019

January 17, 2019

Concerning News from CIA’s Historical Review Panel Requires Clarification

Dr. Robert Jervis, chair of the CIA’s Historical Review Panel, recently announced in an H-Diplo posting that the panel did not meet in June 2018 as planned, and that members were recently informed “the Panel is being restructured and will not meet again until this has been done. The reasons for this remain unclear to us, and no schedule for resumed meetings has been announced.” Jervis notes that the State Department’s Historical Advisory Committee continues to monitor the agency’s cooperation in producing FRUS volumes, but goes on to make several vague references to possible changes to the way the agency reviews historical documents. The announcement states that, had the panel met for its most recent meeting, it would have discussed, among other items, “the implications of the change in the reviewing of documents in the 25-year program from making redactions to the application of the pass/fail standard to the entire document, the review processes and standards for documents that are 50 years old; the possibilities of closer contact with Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requesters; the CIA’s role in reviewing documents for the presidential libraries; and the criteria for selecting topics for special releases.”

Clarification is needed for the opaque references to what could be significant policy changes for the historical community.

Up to Congress and the Courts to Enforce the Presidential Records Act

After news broke that President Trump confiscated notes his interpreter took during his 2017 meeting with Vladimir Putin, National Security Archive director Tom Blanton spoke with Public Radio International’s The World program to explain why – in theory – President Trump can’t destroy or hide records at whim. The Presidential Records Act, passed in 1978 because President Nixon wanted to hide Watergate tapes from the public, mandates that the president “can’t destroy records without the permission of the archivist of the United States, and the archivist of the United States is supposed to bring in the attorney general to take action and stop.” Blanton notes that it’s really up to Congress and the courts, saying “Where the big disputes are is how much review the courts can have over what the president does and how much people like us at the National Security Archive can intervene” to protect records at risk of destruction.

Of the interpreter’s notes Blanton draws another Nixon parallel:

Nixon and Kissinger were pretty famous for creating multiple versions of a transcript of a conversation with a foreign official. So, they would make one version that was complete and that would stay only in a White House safe or in Kissinger’s safe. Another would be more of a summary with kind of the cuss words cut out that could be shared with the State Department. Another would be like a one-page gist, and they’d share that with the Defense Department.

And so, for historians who’ve been putting together those conversations, the tapes really help because they showed the full Monty, if you will, and then all these partial versions that we’ve resurrected, you kind of see a consistent pattern of deceit. Trump’s effort to prevent even a transcript or so-called memoranda of conversation from being available at all is beyond the pale.

OPEN Government Data Act Now Law

The OPEN Government Data Act, which mandates that public information be open by default and in a machine-readable format, is now law. President Trump signed the Foundations for Evidence-Based Policy Making Act of 2018, which includes the OPEN Data Act, on January 15. As the Data Coalition notes, the law also creates “standards for making federal government data available to the public” and requires regular oversight by the Government Accountability Office.

Image courtesy of Reveal.

Tech Companies Tried to Hide Abysmal Diversity Stats Behind FOIA’s Exemption 4. Thanks to a FOIA Suit They Can’t Anymore

Silicon Valley titans Palantir Technologies and Oracle both argued for years that their diversity figures were trade secrets and couldn’t be released through the FOIA. The Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) bought the argument for several years, citing Exemption 4 in denying the FOIA request for the tech companies EEO-1 federally mandated diversity reports (Exemption 4 is intended to protect trade secrets and confidential financial information). Palantir went so far as to tell the Labor Department that revealing their diversity numbers would harm them because it would allow “competitors could identify where Palantir has made significant progress in hiring women and minorities and target recruitment strategies at specific job categories to steal this talent from Palantir.”

Reveal from The Center for Investigative Reporting appealed the Labor Department’s denial and eventually sued – and won – on the grounds that the trade secrets argument was unjustified and that none of the data was confidential. When the reports were released they showed that both Palantir and Oracle huddled towards the bottom rung of diverse workplaces, even by Silicon Valley standards; Palantir for example “had no female executives and only one woman, who was white, among its managers.”

SNAP case goes to Supreme Court with Broad Implications for Exemption 4

MuckRock’s Michael Morisy has a good rundown of the potential implications of the upcoming Supreme Court fight concerning public access to sales figures for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Investigative reporter for the Argus Leader, Jonathan Ellis – who has an excellent write-up of the case here – requested the data for the reimbursements that are part of the food stamps program, a FOIA fight he won in the district court and the appellate court. The Food Marketing Institute has appealed all the way to the Supreme Court, which will hear the case in April. In the interim, the Food Marketing Institute tried to sneak a B(3) exemption into the most recent Farm Bill that would have kept the information confidential; the exemption was part of the House bill but not the Senate’s and was eventually dropped.

As Morisy notes, “If the decisions in favor of release are overturned, lack of access to this data will continue to hold back public spending accountability and nutrition research around the country — and provide corporations a powerful tool to keep public data proprietary in other cases.” Kel McClanahan, Esq., executive director of National Security Counselors adds, “A ruling for the requester would mean nothing more than a continuation of the status quo, where business information can only be withheld under Exemption (b)(4) upon a showing of competitive harm. But a ruling against the requester would turn Exemption (b)(4) into some sort of super-exemption, where the mere fact that business information had not previously been made public would suffice to withhold it.”

FOIA during a Government Shutdown

Curious about the status of your FOIA request during the government shutdown? FOIA Wiki has a good entry detailing the statements put out during the 2013 shutdown by both the Office of Government Information Services and the Justice Department’s Office of Information Policy. OGIS stated during the 2013 shutdown that “the Department of Justice’s Handbook for Agency Annual Freedom of Information Act Reports says that ‘even where an entire agency FOIA office is closed due to weather conditions, furloughed employees, or other circumstances outside of these specified in the statute, the agency must count those days for reporting purposes.’” OIP stated of the same shutdown, “agencies should count as part of their response times for FOIA requests and appeals the eleven days when the government was closed, which excludes the Saturdays, Sundays, and the one legal public holiday that occurred during the shutdown.”

Requesters who choose to submit FOIAs to those agencies closed during the shutdown should be conscientious about following-up to ensure that their request was received and a tracking number was issued.

Comments on Proposed DOI FOIA Changes Not Posted During Shutdown

The public has submitted at least 1,219 comments in response to the Interior Department’ proposed FOIA regulation changes that would allow the agency to preemptively reject what it defines as “unreasonably burdensome” requests, and the possibility of imposing a monthly limit to the number of either pages or requests from a single requester the agency will process, among other concerning changes. But because of the government shutdown, none of the comments have been posted “for public consumption. The result is a kind of regulatory shadow play.”

The comment period is scheduled to end on January 28, but a coalition of more than 150 organizations requested the period be extended at least 120 days.

Taiwan’s Bomb

From the late 1960s until the late 1980s, U.S. government officials worried that Taiwanese leaders might make a “fundamental decision” to develop nuclear weapons. Documents published recently for the first time by the National Security Archive illustrate Washington’s efforts to keep tabs on military and scientific research and to intervene when they believed that Taiwan’s nuclear R&D had gone too far. The posting builds on and adds documentary detail to an important recent publication by the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS), David Albright and Andrea Stricker’s Taiwan’s Former Nuclear Weapons Program: Nuclear Weapons on Demand. Their book provides the most comprehensive account to date of the nuclear program, in part by drawing on documents from the National Security Archive.

Sign Up

Want to stay on top of the latest FOIA news? Click here to sign up for our weekly FRINFORMSUM (Freedom of Information Summary) email newsletter.

Tom Blanton’s ISOO 40th Anniversary Keynote Speech

January 15, 2019

Our director Tom Blanton recently gave the keynote speech at the Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO) 40th anniversary event. ISOO, which is part of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), is charged with standardizing classification and ensuring that information is properly shared.

Blanton, whose speech begins at the 21-minute mark, discussed the origins of ISOO, praised former Director Steve Garfinkel’s ability to push through bulk declassification, and spelled out what NARA needs to do to bring its declassification programs into the twenty-first century.

The whole video is available here:

FOIA Shows How Congressional Diversity Helps Underrepresented Groups, OPEN Data Act Poised to Become Law, and More: FRINFORMSUM 1/11/2019

January 10, 2019

FOIA Shows Benefits of Diversity in Congress

A Washington Post analysis found that legislators from underrepresented groups “disproportionately advocate for these communities.” For example, “Legislators who are women, minorities and/or veterans advocate more actively for citizens from their respective groups. In fact, they’re about six to nine percentage points more likely to contact agencies on behalf of constituents with whom they share a background, compared to their non-veteran, male or white fellow legislators.” The Post’s Kenneth Lowande, Melinda Ritchie, and Erinn Lauterbach made this discovery when they sent 73 Freedom of Information Act requests to various agencies to “to study whether legislators who are members of minority groups are more likely to advocate and intervene with the bureaucracy on behalf of those communities.” Fifteen agencies responded to the FOIA requests with logs that included “correspondence from all members of Congress who served from 2005 to 2014.” The study was undertaken to see if members of underrepresented communities have reason to be optimistic with the new Congress, which is the most diverse in history.

OPEN Data Act Poised to Become Law

The OPEN Government Data Act recently passed Congress as part of the Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking (FEBP) Act and awaits President Trump’s signature. As the Data Coalition notes, “The bill sets a presumption that all government information should be open data by default: machine-readable and freely-reusable.” The Act would make an agency’s failure to use open data “legally questionable,” and requires agencies to “maintain, and publish, a comprehensive data inventory of all data assets. The data inventory will help agencies and open data advocates identify key government information resources and transform them from documents and siloed databases into open data.”

Open Government Partnership Places US Under Review

Alex Howard recently published an update on the US’s lackluster involvement in the Open Government Partnership under the Trump administration. In 2017 the administration committed itself to participating in the multilateral initiative to promote open government, but the US has been placed under review for procedural violations after failing to deliver its 4th National Action Plan for Open Government. Howard notes that “if the USA fails to deliver a new NAP during this Review period (in this case, by August of this year), the OGP Steering Committee will likely vote to agree to making the country inactive.”

Trump Visitor Logs On Appeal in 2nd Circuit

The National Security Archive, together with the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University and the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), is continuing the fight to open the White House visitor logs and the records of presidential visitors to Trump properties, including Mar-a-Lago. The Obama administration routinely released the logs, which are created and controlled by the Secret Service, with no harm to national security or personal privacy. The three organizations filed an appeal in the Second Circuit this week, arguing that the logs are agency records clearly subject to the FOIA, not presidential records that only become available starting five years after the president leaves office.

Read the appeal and the rest of the story here.

MuckRocks Breaks Down What’s in the Interior Department’s Proposed FOIA Changes

MuckRock and Russ Kick recently published an excellent piece breaking down what’s in the Interior Department’s proposed FOIA changes. The proposed FOIA regulation changes were published in the Federal Register the week between Christmas and New Years and the public only has until January 28th to comment. Of highest concern are DOI’s attempt to preemptively reject what it defines as “unreasonably burdensome” requests, the possibility of imposing a monthly limit to the number of either pages or requests from a single requester the agency will process, and a host of other changes that may make it more difficult to obtain fee waivers and expedited processing.

Digital National Security Archive named 2018’s Outstanding Academic Title

Choice Magazine, the publishing arm of the Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL), recently named the Digital National Security Archive an “Outstanding Academic Title” for 2018.  The annual award goes to publications deemed especially worthy of attention from academic librarians seeking to build research collections. DNSA is the Archive’s flagship publication launched in 1989 that includes over 50 collections of declassified documents obtained through in-depth archival research and targeted requests under the Freedom of Information Act. Documentation consists of White House records, international summit meeting transcripts, top-level briefing papers, CIA assessments and covert action reports, military planning documents, State Department telegrams, and other high-level, previously classified materials resulting in what the Washington Journalism Review has called “a state-of-the-art index to history.”

Review the entire collection series here.

When Hackers Went to the Hill — Revisiting the L0pht Hearings of 1998

More than 20 years ago, in May 1998, seven hackers from the Boston-based “hacker think tank” L0pht Heavy Industries, appeared alongside Dr. Peter Neumann, a private sector expert on computer security, before the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs for one of the first-ever Congressional hearings focusing specifically on cybersecurity. Two decades later, many of the problems these experts pointed to are still being confronted

The Archive’s Cyber Vault recently published the transcripts of these ground-breaking hearings along with a variety of subsequent official reports, testimony, and related materials that trace the evolution of U.S. government and public awareness of and approaches to the challenges, problems, and threats posed by the world of cyber. Taken together, the documents offer a glimpse into the scope and complexity of numerous issues that still lack meaningful answers.

TBT Pick – Revisiting the Soviet War in Afghanistan

A 2001 series from the Archive’s John Prados and Svetlana Savranskaya analyzes declassified records and the memoirs of former Soviet officials to examine Soviet policymaking, military operations, and lessons learned from the USSR’s war in Afghanistan – a bloody, ten-year conflict that pitted Soviet military forces against CIA-backed Afghan rebels. The collection also includes excerpts from an essay written by analyst Steve Galster as an introduction to the Archive’s microfiche collection, Afghanistan: The Making of U.S. Policy, 1973-1990, published in 1990.

Sign Up

Want to stay on top of the latest FOIA news? Click here to sign up for our weekly FRINFORMSUM (Freedom of Information Summary) email newsletter.

“Choice” Magazine Names “Digital National Security Archive” an Outstanding Academic Title for 2018

January 8, 2019

Choice Magazine, the publishing arm of the Association of College & Research Libraries (ACRL), has named the Digital National Security Archive an “Outstanding Academic Title” for 2018.  The annual award goes to publications deemed especially worthy of attention from academic librarians seeking to build research collections.

The Digital National Security Archive (DNSA) is the Archive’s flagship publication series featuring declassified documents obtained through in-depth archival research and targeted requests under the Freedom of Information Act. It was launched in 1989 and includes 54 collections as of the end of 2018.  It is published by the academic publisher ProQuest.

Curated by foreign policy specialists with guidance from former officials and top academic experts, the materials are indexed by librarians using extensive item-level metadata and an in-house database of over 100,000 controlled authority terms.

Documentation consists of White House records, international summit meeting transcripts, top-level briefing papers, CIA assessments and covert action reports, military planning documents, State Department telegrams, and other high-level, previously classified materials resulting in what the Washington Journalism Review has called “a state-of-the-art index to history.”

Researchers can easily browse or search and identify specific records via multiple points of access (title, date, origin, destination, keyword, etc.), and go straight to facsimiles of the individual records.  Transcriptions of difficult-to-read items are provided, as are separate versions of materials that have been excised differently by government authorities at various times.

Topics range from the Cuban Missile Crisis to the war on terrorism, Afghanistan to Iraq, Argentina to the Philippines, and presidential directives to military uses of space.

A sampling of DNSA’s most recent publications includes:

CIA Covert Operations, Part III: From Kennedy to Nixon

The third in the Archive’s unparalleled series of primary sources on the CIA’s dark side, curated by Pulitzer-nominated author John Prados, takes the story from the Bay of Pigs disaster into the most controversial secret programs of the Vietnam War such as the Operation Phoenix assassinations.


Soviet-U.S. Relations: The End of the Cold War, 1985-1991

This extraordinary collection includes declassified transcripts of every word the Soviet and American leaders actually said to each other in the historic summit meetings from Geneva 1985 through Moscow 1991, together with the previously secret preparatory and after-action reports from both the Russian and American sides.


Cuba and the U.S.: The Declassified History of Negotiations to Normalize Relations, 1959-2016

Over 1,700 high-level documents on more than 50 years of secret dialogue between the U. S. and Cuba. Based on years of research, this unique set reveals the hidden history of back-channel presidential diplomacy that led to the historic re-establishment of relations in 2015.


Targeting Iraq, Part I: Planning, Invasion, and Occupation, 1997-2004

2,000+ internal documents on one of the most significant U.S. foreign policy issues of our era.  Previously secret policy records from official U.S. and British sources encompass plans for regime change, war and occupation, and the controversy over weapons of mass destruction.

 

New Digital National Security Archive Document Collection Spotlights Soviet-U.S. Relations at Cold War’s End

December 19, 2018

The National Security Archive, working with our partners at ProQuest, is publishing a new compilation of documents on Soviet-U.S. relations at the end of the Cold War. The 1,911-document collection, Soviet-U.S. Relations: The End of the Cold War, 1985-1991, is relevant for researchers studying a range of issues, including:

  • The transformation of U.S.-USSR relations from perestroika until the dissolution of the Soviet Union;
  • The dynamics of superpower relations at the end of the Cold War;
  • And the transformation of the international system in the late 1980s.

The collection features a complete series of U.S.-Soviet summit transcripts from Geneva 1985 through Madrid 1991, between Gorbachev and U.S. presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, as well as memoranda of numerous phone calls between Bush and the Soviet leader, and Reagan and Gorbachev’s letters to each other. From early exchanges of letters between Reagan and Gorbachev after the latter came to power in March 1985 to the last phone call with Bush on December 31, 1991, these documents show the development of a productive relationship based on trust and a mutual interest in reversing the arms race, which provided a basis for spectacular achievements across the entire spectrum of foreign policy issues for both countries and even domestic reform in the USSR.

During the seven years covered in the set, U.S.-Soviet cooperation produced major advances in bilateral relations and in settling third world conflicts. In the most important area of arms control, the two countries signed the Intermediate Nuclear Forces Treaty in December 1987, which eliminated an entire class of nuclear weapon for the first time in history. In 1990, members of NATO and the Warsaw Treaty Organization signed the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty reducing force levels in Europe. In July 1991, at the Moscow Summit, Bush and Gorbachev signed the START I Treaty which decreased numbers of strategic nuclear arms. Documents on negotiations of these treaties from both sides are part of this set, including very rare verbatim records of military-to-military negotiations from the Soviet side.

The end of the Cold War and the new partnership between the United States and the Soviet Union allowed the superpowers to actively engage in mediation of third world disputes, often putting pressure on their own allies in the local conflicts to resolve them peacefully. Primary sources documenting U.S.-Soviet negotiations and joint work on issues such as ending the Soviet war in Afghanistan, resolving conflicts in Southern Africa and Central America, and promoting democratic elections in Nicaragua show how far both sides were willing to go to transform the entire system of international relations and alliances.

In Europe, where the effect of the end of the Cold War was most dramatic, the set covers negotiations on the withdrawal of Soviet troops from Eastern Europe, the evolution of Gorbachev’s idea of the “common European home,” as well as Bush’s concept of “Europe whole and free,” and the interactions of both U.S. and Soviet officials with leaders of East European countries. Discussions of German unification and the related issues of the future of NATO and the Warsaw Pact constitute an important facet of the collection.

U.S. documents in this collection were obtained through Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests to the State Department, Defense Department, the CIA, and the Clinton and Bush presidential libraries. On the Soviet side, notes of Politburo sessions produced by official stenographers and by Gorbachev’s chief foreign policy adviser Anatoly S. Chernyaev document crucial Soviet discussions and evolving cooperative policy toward the United States. Soviet materials relating to the period covered in the set were obtained by National Security Archive staff with the cooperation of the Gorbachev Foundation in Moscow and from declassifications in key Russian archives.

If you don’t already have DNSA, sign up for a free trial today.

New (B)(3)s Find Way Into Farm Bill, College-Sponsored Bank Accounts Charging “Legally Dubious Fees”, and More: FRINFORMSUM 12/13/2018

December 13, 2018
tags: , ,

(B)(3) Exemptions Find Way Into Farm Bill 

Two proposed (B)(3) exemptions that will prevent the public from knowing information it should have access to are included in the Farm Bill. The carve-outs concern rural broadband information (which appears to benefit large telecom corporations at the cost of local smaller companies – text page 257) and an agricultural research pilot program (page 317).

FOIA’s (B)(3) exemption is an expansive and pernicious one that captures “the various nondisclosure provisions that are contained in other federal statutes.” The nondisclosure provisions are so numerous that they are a large part of the reason why the FOIA doesn’t effectively have just its nine statutory exemptions – it has closer to 250 – including one about watermelon production data.

Even if the Farm Bill exemptions are merited, which is unclear, any proposed FOIA exemption should go through the normal, established process and be thoroughly vetted by the Senate Judiciary Committee and House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

College-Sponsored Bank Accounts Charging “Legally Dubious Fees”

College students that take advantage of school-sponsored bank accounts pay over three times as much in fees, this according to a 2018 Consumer Financial Protection Bureau report released through the FOIA. The report, which was initially prepared by the CFPB and shared with the Department of Education, surveyed nearly 600 schools and found that students at universities that enter into marketing agreements with financial institutions and who take part in the paid promotion accounts are charged “legally dubious fees.” The schools that take part in the financial marketing receive payments from banks based on the number of students that enroll in the accounts, raising concerns about conflict of interest.

The 2018 report echoes finding of an earlier 2016 CFBP report, which found “many schools are more focused on their bottom line than their students’ well-being when they agree to sponsor financial accounts,” and comes at a time when the student loan ombudsman office at the CFBP has been vacant for four months. The most recent ombudsman, Seth Frotman, blamed the CFPB for burying the 2016 findings in his resignation letter, stating that “when new evidence came to light showing that the nation’s largest banks were ripping off students on campuses across the country by saddling them with legally dubious fees, Bureau leadership suppressed the publication of a report prepared by Bureau staff.”

Zinke Loyalist and Political Appointee to Oversee Interior FOIA Shop

Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke recently deviated from norms and installed a political appointee to head the agency’s FOIA office, a position that is normally lead by career staff to avoid the appearance of politicization of the release of information. The new chief FOIA officer is Daniel Jorjani, who has previously acted as an adviser to Charles and David Koch. The move comes on the heels of the Justice Department launching an investigation into Zinke and at a time when the FOIA office is receiving an influx of requests.

Zinke’s order appointing Jorjani implied he believes Jorjani will streamline the office, stating, “It is clear that some aspects of the FOIA program’s decentralized structure hinder efficient and effective management of operations in the current environment.”

A document released through FOIA earlier this year painted Jorjani as a Zinke loyalist, telling a staffer that “At the end of the day, our job is to protect the Secretary.”

New Pre-Publication Review Policy on the Way

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence told Steve Aftergood in response to his FOIA request that a new, IC-wide pre-publication review policy is on the way. Two years ago the House Intelligence Committee directed the ODNI “ to improve the government’s controversial policy on reviewing books, articles and speeches by current and former intelligence employees prior to their publication, so as to make the process more uniform, timely and fair.” Until the ODNI launches the new policy, current and former employees must comply with the existing policy dating from 2014.

CIA Vowed To “Continue to Fight to Abolish FOIA”

Muckrock recently highlighted a jarring discussion among CIA employees during a 1984 team building exercise that included a frank assessment of the agency’s stance on FOIA – that their position should be to “continue to fight to abolish” the transparency law. As JPat Brown notes, “While the CIA’s opposition to FOIA has been extensively documented throughout this project, it’s rare to see the matter discussed in such explicit terms. The fact that it was a single line in a document that had only been declassified in 2010, and even then only made public last year as a result of our three year lawsuit, is a testament to the Agency’s commitment to keeping its history hidden.”

Secretary of State Dean G. Acheson. Photo taken at Acheson’s office in 1950, from collection of Harry S. Truman Library, accession number 85-63.

NATO’s Original Purpose: Double Containment of the Soviet Union and “Resurgent” Germany

Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara sent an illuminating memo to President Lyndon B. Johnson in Fall 1966 that explained the political reasons for keeping U.S. troops in Europe: to maintain NATO’s “cohesion,” to prevent Soviet “political blackmail,” to deter “any bilateral Soviet-FRG [Federal Republic of Germany] security agreement,” and to discourage “the revival of German militarism,” according to a collection of previously classified documents recently published by the Archive.

Against the current backdrop of discussions at the top levels of the U.S. government over security guarantees in Europe, McNamara’s memo and a selection of other declassified U.S. documentation provide historical context for decades of U.S. policy toward Europe and more specifically the functions of NATO and the relationship between Germany and European security.

Reagan, Gorbachev and Bush at Governors Island

The U.S. and NATO allies worried about losing control of the public narrative of the Cold War in December 1988 after Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev’s offer of an arms race in reverse in his famous United Nations speech, according to declassified documents published this week by the National Security Archive. The documents were published in time to mark the 30th anniversary of Gorbachev’s groundbreaking U.N. speech and describe a number of interesting items, including the U.S. debrief to allies about the Soviet leader’s subsequent short summit with President Ronald Reagan and President-elect George H.W. Bush at Governors Island in New York harbor, and a discussion with the Pakistani ambassador that shows deep suspicion on the part of a senior State Department official about Soviet intentions and reveals that the U.S. had no strategy for Afghanistan beyond lubricating the Soviet withdrawal.

The new documents add to the extensive body of evidence previously published by the Archive, both on the Web in 2008 and in the award-winning book, The Last Superpower Summits: Gorbachev, Reagan, and Bush: Conversations that Ended the Cold War (CEU Press, 2016).

For Fun – Can You Outsmart the NSA?

Try to solve puzzles from the spy agency’s in-house magazine CRYPTOLOG, a large collection of which we recently posted and indexed in our Cyber Vault. Search keyword “Puzzle” to try 100+ brainteasers, then “Solution” or “Answer.”

Sign Up

Want to stay on top of the latest FOIA news? Click here to sign up for our weekly FRINFORMSUM (Freedom of Information Summary) email newsletter.

FOIAonline Still Broken Six Months After Disastrous Redesign: FRINFORMSUM 12/6/2018

December 6, 2018

FOIAonline Still Broken Six Months After Disastrous Redesign

Six months ago the would-be government-wide FOIA portal, FOIAonline, was redesigned and the site lost much of its functionality as a result. (The Reporters Committee’s Adam Marshall has a good run-down of all the things wrong with the site here.) In July FOIAonline posted a notice on its homepage saying the setback would only be short-term, claiming that “Much of the information from the previous version of FOIAonline is not yet in 3.0. This process is expected to take several weeks to complete. We appreciate your patience as we continue to work through the most recent cases to the oldest.”

Several weeks turned into six months and there are still no updates about when we can expect the website, which the Environmental Protection Agency provides the IT for, to return to its previous usability.

Security Oversight Office Celebrates 40th Anniversary and Asks How to Fix Declassification

The Information Security Oversight Office, which oversees the government-wide security classification system, celebrated its 40th anniversary today and asked how to fix declassification at an event in DC. The National Security Archive’s Director Tom Blanton gave the keynote address, which was followed by a panel discussion with four former ISOO directors as they shared their perspective on how the agency should evolve as the government’s work becomes increasingly digital. An idea embraced by Blanton and several others is to empower the National Declassification Center to take control of historic documents that are 25-years-old or older, rather than letting agencies drag their feet and conducting costly reviews of the documents.

Metro Was Willing to Give Special Treatment to “Unite the Right” Rally Organizer

A public records request revealed that the Washington D.C. area- transit authority, Metro, “was willing to work with the organizer of a white supremacist rally in Washington this summer to provide special accommodations for his group.” The emails contradict Metro’s earlier position that it did not try to facilitate travel for the hate group.

This summer Jason Kessler, who helped organize the 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, VA, asked for special treatment to travel from Virginia to the capital for a “Unite the Right 2” event.  Kessler said he “would like to coordinate with your department for the safety of my demonstrators and the general public. We are anticipating a potential for violence from left-wing Antifa groups and are concerned about the public transit process being vulnerable points for an ambush.” A Metro employee said “Absolutely…please feel free to call me at your convenience.”

News leaked that Metro could provide a special train for Kessler and his group, and Metro faced outrage from elected officials, the public, and Metro’s labor union. Metro then shifted its posture and said that the idea of special accommodations for rally-goers was “a joint law enforcement operation with a unified command” and that the D.C. metropolitan police were the lead agency – an account the police denied.

Metro initially denied the records request, citing the security of Metro operations and the safety of customers and employees, but an appeal won the release of the information.

Political Aide at VA Shut Down Top Diversity Officer After Charlottesville

Department of Veterans Affairs’ emails obtained through FOIA by American Oversight and shared with the Washington Post show that a top White House appointee “sought to silence the agency’s chief diversity officer, who — in the aftermath of last year’s racially charged violence in Charlottesville — pushed for a forceful condemnation that was at odds with President Trump’s response.” The White House appointee, John Ullyot, initially told the diversity specialist, Georgia Coffey, to drop the idea of sending a statement to agency employees and the public strongly condemning the white supremacist rally. (Unconfirmed reports allege Ullyot was following a White House directive not to draw attention to the events or President Trump’s “all sides” comment.) Ullyot said an email was unnecessary because the VA secretary had already made a similar statement earlier in the week – although he also said “we should all feel free to share our own personal views on the recent events.” Coffey eventually decided to post the comments, signed in her own name, to the diversity office website. VA officials removed the post and reprimanded her, and she retired shortly after.

Cyber Brief: Cryptolog

Five years ago, the National Security Agency released 136 issues of its internal Cryptolog periodical spanning 1974 through 1997. The collection offers a look into the some of the discussions being held within one of America’s most secretive intelligence agencies and also serves as a vehicle for organizational reflection. Conflict between linguists and cryptanalysts over promotions and pay scales rages in the pages of Cryptolog for two years, and a four-part series on the agency’s intern program was published in 1974. The National Security Archive is now providing a complete index of all 1,504 items in the declassified collection, including but not limited to articles, interviews, and puzzles.

TBT Pick – A Quarter Century of U.S. Support for East Timor Occupation

This week’s #TBT pick from 2005 highlight’s the East Timor Truth Commission report’s use of declassified US documents to call for reparations resulting from the US’s support of the Indonesian invasion and occupation of East Timor from 1975 until 1999. The Archive provided the commission over 1,000 declassified documents to aid the effort in absence of any help from the US governments. The documents show, among other things, that nearly ten months prior to Indonesia’s invasion of East Timor, the US Embassy in Jakarta and the State Department were paying close attention to the Indonesian military buildup and propaganda campaign. By March, 1975 the National Security Council was recommending “a policy of silence” regarding Indonesia’s intention to “incorporate Portuguese Timor by force.”

In 2001 the Archive posted newly declassified documents showing that Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and President Gerald Ford gave the green light to Indonesia’s 1975 invasion of East Timor, the beginning of a 24-year occupation in which more than 100,000 Timorese died.

Sign Up

Want to stay on top of the latest FOIA news? Click here to sign up for our weekly FRINFORMSUM (Freedom of Information Summary) email newsletter.