United States
Department of Defense
Legacy Resource Management Program
The Declassification Backlog of Historic Records:
A Problem For Both the
Department of Defense
and All Those Who Seek a Better Understanding of the Cold
War
Prepared in Cooperation with
the
Organization of American Historians
December, 1994
Stewardship - Leadership - Partnership
Legacy The Legacy Resource Management Program was established by the Congress of the United States in 1991 to provide the Department of Defense with an opportunity to enhance the management of stewardship resources on over 25 million acres of land under DOD jurisdiction. Legacy allows DoD to determine how to better integrate the conservation of irreplaceable biological, cultural, and geophysical resources with the dynamic requirements of military mission. To achieve this goal, DoD give high priority to inventorying, protecting, and restoring biological, cultural, and geophysical resources in a comprehensive, cost-effective manner, in partnership with Federal, State, and local agencies, and private groups. Legacy activities help to ensure that DoD personnel better understand the need for protection and conservation of natural and cultural resources, and that the management of these resources will be fully integrated with, and support, DoD mission activities and the public interest. Through the combined efforts of the DoD components, Legacy seeks to achieve its legislative purposes with cooperation, industry, and creativity to make the DoD the Federal environmental leader. |
Report Preparation
In partnership with the
Organization of American Historians
Prepared by
Page Putnam Miller, Director of
the National Coordinating Committee for the Promotion of History
Special thanks to
| Many people provided helpful comments on these papers
and their assistance is appreciated. I wish especially to
recognize the help of Dr. Anna R. Nelson, Professor of
History at American University and a member of the State
Department Advisory Committee on Historical Diplomatic
Documentation and a member of the Assassinations Records
Review Board, and Sheryl Walter, who served for seven
years as General Counsel of the National Security Archive
before recently becoming General Counsel of the
Assassinations Records Review Board. The assistance of
three graduate history students at the University of
Maryland -- Edwin Beckham, John Harper, and Johnathan
O'Neill -- was essential to the preparation of these
papers. This document was prepared
for the Legacy Program. |
The Declassification Backlog
of Historic Records:
A Problem For Both the Department of Defense and All Those Who
Seek a
Better Understanding of the Cold War
| Introduction | |
| Paper I | The Appropriate Criteria for Continued Classification of Historical Records: Balancing the Public's Right to Know with the Protection of Sensitive Information |
| Paper II | Foreign Government Information: A Declassification Policy Problem |
| Paper III | Dispersal of Authority: The Difficulties of Coordination |
| Paper IV | The Role of an Interagency Review Panel in Declassification Policy |
| Conclusion | |
| Appendix |
| In 1993 the Organization of American Historians with
the Director of the National Coordinating Committee, Page
Putnam Miller, servicing as special investigator became
the recipient of a Department of Defense Legacy Grant.
The purpose of this grant has been to explore the
problems that have contributed to the enormous backlog of
classified historic records and to prepare four position
papers that address the most pertinent issues. This
document was prepared for the Legacy Program. It does not
necessarily reflect the policy or practices of the
Department of Defense. The Legacy Resource Management Program was established by Congress in 1991 to provide the Department of Defense with an opportunity to enhance their management of both natural and cultural resources. One component of the Legacy Project is a Cold War Task Area. Many within the historical profession have noted that the goal of making available the history of the Department of Defense during the Cold War rests on access to records, many of which are still classified. A large percentage of the Department of Defense records from the l950s and early 1960s are still closed, making it difficult for federal employees, as well as scholars, to study in depth the Cold War. In making a case for increased access to historical documents many decades old, Melvyn Leffler, Chairman of the History Department at the University of Virginia, noted in an address before a Legacy Conference on October 20, 1992, that "A policy of openness breeds understanding of the dilemmas that policymakers faced, of the agonizing decision they had to make, of the excruciating tradeoffs they had to accept, of the incomplete information they had when they could no longer postpone decisions." As Leffler eloquently stated: "Openness leads to understanding, to empathy, to constructive introspection, to healthy criticism. In contrast, a policy of restriction exacerbates public distrust of government which today is omnipresent." The following papers are written from the perspective of historians seeking to better understand the past but constantly being frustrated by lack of access to crucial policy documents. From the vantage point of historians the first and major problem contributing to the enormous backlog of classified historical records is the lack of precise and narrowly defined classification criteria which balances the public's right to know with the protection of sensitive information. Two technical problems -- the handling of "foreign government information" and the decentralization of declassification policy -- have also made it difficult for the federal government to release old records in a cost-effective manner. Fourth, the absence of a high level interagency review panel to coordinate policy and address problems has exacerbated efforts to develop a more workable system. When the Organization of American Historians applied for this Legacy Grant in the fall of 1992, President Clinton had not issued his directive calling for a redrafting of the Executive Order that determines classification/declassification policy. Thus, it was not anticipated at the time we first considered this project, that we would be studying a subject that was evolving almost monthly. However, this has made the project even more stimulating. It is our hope that these four position papers will contribute to further dialogue between those inside and outside government about appropriate reforms to the United States information security policies. |
Back
to...
On to... |