Browsing Category

Pentagon Papers

Ellsberg’s “Desperate Proposal Pattern”

by Thomas Reifer

At the height of global demonstrations against Israel’s radically disproportionate response to the horrific October 7, 2023 terrorist attacks by Hamas against Israel, which killed some 1,200 people with 240 hostages taken, headlines around the world proclaimed that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is vowing to go ahead with his long-planned full scale invasion of Rafah, in Gaza — at a time when some 30,000 Palestinians have already been reported killed by Israel.

How to explain Netanyahu’s determination to proceed at all costs, defying massive protests in Israel and across the world calling for a hostage deal and a ceasefire?  It may be useful to revisit Daniel Ellsberg’s concept of the “Desperate Proposal Pattern,” a theme to which Ellsberg returned many times in his lectures, discussions and private writings on contemporary and historical happenings.

Ellsberg described the Desperate Proposal Pattern this way: “To avoid an ‘intolerable’ (infinitely negative) outcome, any measure with some chance of success is justified, no matter how low its probability of success, or how high its costs and risks. Hence there is no need to report or even calculate the latter considerations; it is enough to say that, unlike current policy, the one proposed is not certain to fail.

Continue Reading

50th Anniversary of the Pentagon Papers Release – 6/13/21

Fifty years ago today, on 6/13/71, the first set of excerpts from the Pentagon Papers was published in the New York Times: Vietnam Archive: Pentagon Study Traces 3 Decades of Growing U. S. Involvement. Leaked by Daniel Ellsberg, the 42-volume top-secret study revealed the history of Vietnam decision-making and the lies that were told by four U.S. presidents to cultivate public support for the war.

Selected Media Coverage

New York Times special report on the 50th anniversary of the Pentagon Papers:

‘We’re Going to Publish’: An Oral History of the Pentagon Papers, New York Times, 6/9/21

The Secrets and Lies of the Vietnam War, Exposed in One Epic Document, by Elizabeth Becker, New York Times, 6/9/21

Continue Reading

50th Anniversary of the Pentagon Papers: Conference, Course & Podcast at UMass Amherst

Although it is still being processed and is not fully accessible to the public, Daniel Ellsberg’s archive at UMass-Amherst is already in active use. The university’s recent acquisition of the Ellsberg papers, together with the pending Pentagon Papers 50th anniversary, informed the recent Truth and Dissent conference, a yearlong graduate course, a new archive web resource, and a 5-part podcast by GroundTruth.

—The University of Massachusetts-Amherst recently hosted Truth, Dissent & the Legacy of Daniel Ellsberg, a two-day online conference marking the 50th anniversary of the release of the Pentagon Papers. Ellsberg’s keynote address plus seven roundtable discussions explored the major issues that have engaged his life: the Vietnam War, nuclear weapons, antiwar resistance, the Pentagon Papers, Watergate, whistleblowing, and the wars of the 21st century. Videos of all of the sessions can be viewed here.

—In a related project, GroundTruth launched The Whistleblower. This five-part podcast series explores Ellsberg’s life story through exclusive interviews as well as archival materials.

Continue Reading

“Going Underground,” From “Secrets”

From Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers by Daniel Ellsberg

Chapter 29: Going Underground

[Previous chapter on Daniel’s relations with Neil Sheehan]

On Monday evening, June 14, 1971, we went to a dinner party at the house of Peter Edelman and Marian Wright Edelman. It was jammed with people sitting on the floor and sofas with plates in their laps, and there were two topics of conversation: What the Pentagon Papers were revealing, and who had given them to the New York Times.  Patricia and I listened without contributing much. Jim Vorenberg was eating, on the floor, in one corner of the room. Our eyes didn’t meet.

Tuesday morning the third installment appeared. Attorney General John Mitchell sent a letter to the New York Times  asking it to suspend publication and to hand over its copy of the study. The Times  declined, and that afternoon the Justice Department filed a demand, the first in our country’s history, for an injunction in federal district court in New York. The judge granted a temporary restraining order while he considered the injunction. For the first time since the Revolution, the presses of an American newspaper were Stopped from printing a scheduled story by federal court order. The First Amendment, saying “Congress shall pass no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press,” had always been held above all to forbid “prior restraint” of newspaper or book publication by federal or state government, including courts and the executive branch. The Nixon Justice Department was making a pioneering experiment, asking federal courts to violate or ignore the Constitution or in effect to abrogate the First Amendment. It was the boldest assertion during the cold war that “national security” overrode the constitutional guarantees of the Bill of Rights.

Continue Reading

Daniel Ellsberg’s Relations with Neil Sheehan, as Told in “Secrets”

From Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers
Chapter 26: To the New York Times

[Here’s a link directly to the most relevant section below]

On February 28, 1971, I was in Washington on a Sunday night to take part in a panel the next day at the National War College. I had dinner with Dick Barnet, Mark Raskin, and Ralph Stavins of the Institute for Policy Studies, a left-wing think tank. They were working on a book analyzing U.S. involvement in Vietnam in relation to war crimes. As background for their research I had actually given them parts of the Pentagon study, including my own draft of the 1961 decisions, and they had followed my efforts to get it out through Congress.

When they pressed me now on how I was doing, I told them about striking out with Fulbright and McGovern. They said that they thought it was very important that I get it out. They wanted their book out by June, and they were counting on being able to refer to the documentation in the study.

They told me I ought to take it to the New York Times,  the same thing Fulbright and McGovern had mentioned. I had always thought of this choice as a backup, though it seemed unlikely that a newspaper would do more than publish some excerpts. But at this point it was looking as though Congress was closed off. Among newspapers, the Times  was the obvious choice. It was the only journal of record, the only paper that printed long accounts, such as speeches and press conferences, in their entirety. No other paper would do that. Only the Times  might publish the entire study, and it had the prestige to carry it through.

They asked me if I knew anybody at the Times. I told them I knew Neil Sheehan from Vietnam. I didn’t mention that I had also given him top secret leaks in 1968. For that very reason I had tended to stay away from him in recent years. But now all the signs seemed to be pointing me in his direction.

Continue Reading

Daniel Ellsberg’s Efforts to Release the Pentagon Papers to Congress, as Told in “Secrets”

From Secrets: A Memoir of Vietnam and the Pentagon Papers by Daniel Ellsberg, Chapter 25: Congress

In late December 1970 I had what turned out to be my next-to-last talk with Senator Fulbright, in his office, about what to do with the Pentagon Papers. He now had nearly everything I had, including NSSM-r and my notes on the Ponturo study of Tonkin Gulf. Norvil Jones had made it clear that there would be no public hearings on the war of the sort he’d envisioned back in May, during the Cambodian invasion. The public concern just wasn’t there anymore, nor was there support for such hearings on the Foreign Relations Committee itself. The war had scarcely been an issue in the November congressional elections. Fulbright himself didn’t disagree with my own urgent concern, after the failed Son Tay raid to rescue American prisoners of war, and the renewed bombing of North Vietnam, that the war would soon be getting larger, but he didn’t see much possibility of mobilizing opposition in Congress until that happened.

As for the Pentagon Papers, Fulbright seemed sympathetic to my desire to find some way, apart from immediate hearings, to bring them to bear on the continuing war. He mentioned a number of ways in which it would still be possible to get the papers out with relatively little damage to me, though that wasn’t my major concern. He raised the possibility of issuing a subpoena to Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird for the papers. He didn’t have to limit himself, he said, to requesting them from Laird, as he had done several times so far. He could demand them.

At this point Norvil revealed what I take it had been his real worry from the beginning. He thought that the committee, even if it got the papers from Laird by request or subpoena, couldn’t put them out to the public on its own, without administration approval. Even more, the chairman couldn’t do it on his own because he and the committee were supposed to safeguard for the Senate as a whole classified material, which they got all the time and for which they had storage facilities. If Fulbright leaked the papers or went ahead and distributed or published them, he could be charged with having jeopardized the ability to get classified material from the executive, not only for the committee or himself but for the entire Senate. Jones also mentioned that the committee members, and in particular its staff members, were often accused of leaking. It was easy for me to guess that Jones himself didn’t want to be accused of this. He had often shown great concern that I not reveal to anyone that I had given the papers to Fulbright.

Fulbright told me that he had asked Laird several times now for the study, but it seemed unlikely that he was going to get it. It was becoming clear to me that Jones was not going to encourage Fulbright to stick his neck out by releasing or using what I’d given him. Fulbright himself said to me, “Isn’t it after all only history?” I said, well, yes, but it seemed to me quite important history. It was also a history that wasn’t over yet. He said, “But does it really matter? Is there much in there that we don’t know?” He asked if I would give him an example of a revelation that would make a big splash.

Continue Reading

Pentagon Papers Officially Declassified on the 40th Anniversary of Their Publication – 40 Years Late

June 13th, 2011, marks the 40th anniversary of the initial publication of the Pentagon Papers in the New York Times.

Daniel Ellsberg was interviewed for pieces in both the New York Times and CNN on the anniversary, and on the government’s decision to declassify the Papers.

In the New York Times piece, Daniel said:

It’s absurd. . . . The reasons [for keeping it secret all these years] are very clearly domestic political reasons, not national security at all. The reasons for the prolonged secrecy are to conceal the fact that so much of the policy making doesn’t bear public examination. It’s embarrassing, or even incriminating. . . .

It seems to me that what the Pentagon Papers really demonstrated 40 years ago was the price of [Congress giving its war powers to the President. . . . ] [L]etting a small group of men in secret in the executive branch make these decisions — initiate them secretly, carry them out secretly and manipulate Congress, and lie to Congress and the public as to why they’re doing it and what they’re doing — is a recipe for, a guarantee of Vietnams and Iraqs and Libyas, and in general foolish, reckless, dangerous policies.

In the CNN piece, which contains a longer interview with Daniel, he said: Continue Reading