424. Memorandum From Harold H. Saunders of the National Security Council Staff to the President’s Special Assistant (Rostow)1
SUBJECT
- Poison Gas in Yemen
Since your discussion in staff meeting this morning Peter Jessup has requested a full CIA rundown on the evidence of the UAR’s use of poison gas. The intelligence community has already gone over the evidence we have with inconclusive results. The study Peter has requested will give us the latest judgment.2
Spurgeon Keeny is also in touch with the agency’s scientific people and we will stay in touch with Dr. Hornig’s staff. Spurgeon rightly feels that they can be useful in making sure the intelligence people make the most of the evidence we have.
State doesn’t want us to get too far out in front on this, and I think they’re right. The UN now has two formal requests—one from Yemen and one surprisingly from the UAR—to investigate Saudi charges.3 The next step should be a UN investigation, which we’d support. (The convention on poison gas is a UN, not a Red Cross responsibility.)
Our public posture so far has been that we do not have conclusive independent evidence of our own and therefore can not pronounce ourselves on the merits of the case. However, we do deplore the use of poison gas anywhere. That may continue to be the best posture, but CIA’s study will hopefully give us a better base for our behind-scenes maneuvers.
- Source: Johnson Library, National Security File, Country File, Yemen, Cables & Memos, Vol. II, 7/64-12/68. Secret.↩
- No CIA study has been found.↩
- In response to a Saudi suggestion that the United States analyze blood samples from alleged Yemen poison gas victims, telegram 123250 to Jidda, January 22, instructed the Embassy to state that it would be preferable if scientific tests to determine UAR use of poison gas in Yemen were performed by an international agency or in a country having no direct interest in the region. (National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1967-69, POL 27-10 YEMEN)↩