Last month saw the publication of a newly declassified report submitted by then-KGB Director Yuri Andropov to the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union based on “confidential” conversations with US business and political leaders regarding the dangerous direction led by US President Jimmy Carter. The initial text below, from the FSB website, provides important context, albeit from the eyes of today’s Russian Federation FSB. The second block of text, separated from the first by the famous snap of Brezhnev kissing Carter, is the translation of the report, formerly classified as “Top Secret”.
“Further escalation of tensions in the world is too dangerous a game that could lead to catastrophic consequences…”
The years of US President Jimmy Carter’s rule (1977–1981) was accompanied by a new round of aggravation of Soviet-American relations.
Despite the June 1979 signing of the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty (SALT II) between the USSR and the US, in December of that year, under pressure from Washington, the NATO Council decided to deploy American medium-range missiles in a number of Western European countries. The SALT II treaty was not ratified by the US Congress.
On July 25, 1980, President Carter signed the classified Presidential Directive No. 59, which outlined a “new nuclear doctrine.” The document envisaged the possibility of the US starting a full-scale nuclear war against the Soviet Union.
On August 21, 1980, US Secretary of Defense Harold Brown gave a speech at the Naval War College in Newport, Rhode Island, that was seen as the official announcement of the new nuclear strategy developed by the Carter administration.
In his speech, Brown stated that Jimmy Carter initially gave the order to review the policy of selecting targets for nuclear strikes against the Soviet Union back in the summer of 1977 (six months after he took office).
Defense Secretary Brown argued that Directive 59 did not represent a radical departure from U.S. strategic policy of the past decade. He also argued that the new nuclear strategy was not a first-strike strategy.
However, the explanations offered by the SecDef indicated just the opposite, that the presidential directive was based on the possibility of a “preventive nuclear strike,” with which the United States hoped to win a nuclear war.
Regarding Brown’s speech, an editorial article in the New York Times noted: “…from his speech it follows that the United States may be the first to use nuclear weapons even in the event of a conflict using conventional weapons…” (See: “Directive No. 59 is enacted” // Pravda No. 235. August 22, 1980).
In the Soviet Union, the course chosen by the Carter administration to worsen Soviet-American relations and intensify the nuclear arms race caused legitimate concern.
On June 16, 1980, Chairman of the USSR State Security Committee Yuri Andropov sent a report to the Central Committee of the CPSU about the growing dissatisfaction in business and political circles of the United States with Carter’s foreign policy course and the state of Soviet-American relations.
The document, in particular, noted that “the opinion is gradually gaining ground among the business world that further escalation of tensions in the world is too dangerous a game, which could lead to catastrophic consequences.”
As the document shows, the Carter administration’s foreign policy also alarmed the Democratic Party leadership:
“…and the Democratic Party leadership is growing dissatisfied with Carter and his administration. The Democratic National Committee is increasingly wondering whether Carter will ensure the Democrats’ victory in the presidential election. The party leadership is concerned about the fact that many voters, as the primaries showed, are casting their ballots for Reagan. This does not mean that they sympathize with him, they just don’t like Carter…”
According to the USSR KGB, the upcoming presidential elections in November 1980 would contribute to positive changes in Soviet-American relations. To a certain extent, this forecast was justified:
“…after the elections, regardless of who is in the White House, the situation should change for the better. Indicative in this regard is the statement of the vice-president of one of the largest American companies, Radio Corporation of America, Sloat, who asserts that in America ‘there are good, reasonable people who will contribute to the improvement of relations between the USSR and the USA.’”
Top Secret
Copy No. 2
16.06.80 No. 1166-A TsK KPSS
A number of observations from members of business and political circles regarding Carter’s policies toward the USSR
Summary. In US business and political circles, disapproval is growing regarding Carter’s foreign policy attitude toward the USSR, specifically, the current state of Soviet-American relations. Opinions are being expressed that, after the election, the situation should take a turn for the better.
As seen from information coming to the Committee for State Security, disapproval is growing within US business and political circles for Carter’s foreign policy attitude, and specifically, the current state of Soviet-American relations. Judging from confidential observations from Deputy Chairman of the Board of General Electric Hood, who enjoys close ties in Congress and many federal agencies, including the Pentagon, the business world is seeing a gradually strengthening position that a further escalation of tension in the world is too dangerous a game that can lead to catastrophic consequences. Representatives from many large US corporations are more and more frequently expressing dissatisfaction in the fact that the Administration’s interference in business affairs is disrupting traditional economic ties, limiting their scope of business activities, and forcing businessmen to miss out on lucrative deals. As Hood explains, the Carter administration is currently exerting strong pressure on corporations that have business dealings in the USSR, and threatening to cut off their defense contracts if they attempt to continue contacts with Soviet organizations. The current situation is even starting to cause concern among the likes of the Rockefellers who, according to Hood, have bailed Carter out and invested large amounts of month to his election campaign.
In unofficial conversations with Soviet representatives, American businessmen are sending the message that the current abnormal situation in Soviet-American relations shouldn’t last much longer. According to Paine, the head of Northrup, and Nye, a representative for Atlantic Richfield Oil [ARCO], the administration is starting to understand that the unrestrained escalation of tension does not sit well with the business world. As Paine noted, Big Business has not yet been told that contacts with the USSR have to be reintroduced, but it is already clear to the State Department that certain ties have to be maintained, that “the thread must not be broken,” and that the White House “is not averse to a few contacts, but the President doesn’t understand that it’s necessary right now.”
Many businessmen are stressing that by no means are all American companies interested in manufacturing arms. It’s true, as Beeck, the Vice President of General Electric stated, it’s a disadvantageous matter, for example, the delivery of weapons to Europe, since “it costs money to delivery missiles, it isn’t free.” However, he noted, the American system is quite flexible and “can swiftly be reworked to produce irons, or any other goods required by the American customer.”
Shriver, a prominent figure in the Democratic Party and closely tied to the leading members of US business circles, asserts that dissatisfaction is growing within the Democratic Party leadership with Carter and his administration’s activities. In the Democratic National Committee, more and more are wondering whether or not Carter can secure a victory for the Democrats in the presidential election. Party leadership is concerned that many voters, as shown in the primaries, prefer Reagan. This doesn’t necessarily indicate that they prefer Reagan, but instead are not happy with Carter. Shriver admitted that Carter is succeeding in playing on American chauvinistic attitudes, since grass-roots voters are extremely ill-informed and believe that the Soviet Union is supposedly a threat to the United States and its allies.
The creation of an environment of anti-Soviet hysteria in the US, per Shriver, is fostered by the activities of the notorious “Committee on the Present Danger”. However, in the US, he stated, not everyone supports the views promoted by Carter and members of this committee. As Shriver notes, even now prominent figures in the Democratic Party are actively advancing the idea of the creation of the “Committee on the Present Danger,” whose activities could further the gradual change in the attitudes of the American people to expand the economic, cultural, and scientific-technical exchange between the US and the USSR.
Overall, as attested by numerous conversations with members of American business and political circles, the US is gradually increasing an understanding of the need to normalize Soviet-American relations, and expressing the hope that, after the election, regardless of who winds up in the White House, the situation should change for the better. Indicative in this regard is the assertion by the Vice President of one of America’s largest companies, Radio Corporation of America [RCA], “there are good, reasonable people who will contribute to the improvement of relations between the USSR and the US.”
Yu. Andropov
Translating History 
This is very interesting stuff. Hearing what officials thought at the time creates a context that the public misses. Great content!
LikeLiked by 1 person