
The Cover A Titan II missile, one of the symbols of the Cold War, leaves a launch complex at Cape Canaveral, Florida, in a firing test on September 12, 1962. The last liquid-fueled intercontinental ballistic missile in American inventories, the Titan II was manufactured by the Martin Corporation for the Air Force and could deliver multiple nuclear warheads. Titan IIs remained in service from 1963 to 1987. |
|
Legacy Resource Management The Legacy Resource Management Program was established by the Congress of the United States in 1991 under Public Law No. 101-511, §8120, to provide for stewardship over specified physical and paper historic records and some twenty-five million acres of land under Department of Defense jurisdiction. The legislation requires the department to integrate its traditional defense missions with the conservation of irreplaceable biological, cultural, archaeological, archival, historical, and geophysical resources. To achieve this goal, the Department of Defense has initiated a program giving priority to the enumeration, protection, and restoration of these resources in cost-effective partnership with federal, state, and local agencies and private groups. |
Coming in from the Cold: Military Heritage of the Cold War
summarizes the efforts that the Department of Defense (DoD) has
undertaken in response to the Congressional mandate to "inventory,
protect, and conserve" the heritage of DoD during the Cold War. These
activities were conducted by the Cold War Task Area, one of the major
study groups of DoD's Legacy Resource Management Program, established by
Congress in the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 1991. In
deciding how to organize the project, and in identifying the major
issues to be addressed, the Cold War Task Area contacted DoD personnel,
scholars, and others knowledgeable about the Cold War and concerned with
its legacy. It then determined the types of cultural resources to be
studied and the kinds of information to be collected in order to record
the U.S. military's role during the Cold War, both at home and abroad.
It selectively sampled conditions in the field by making site visits to
representative military facilities in the United States and overseas.
The Task Area then devised a set of projects to survey, document, and
preserve Cold War resources. This Report describes those
investigations, sets out an action plan for the Task Area, provides a
general typology of Cold War resources, and offers recommendations for
the future.
Chapter I, "The Legacy Cold War Project," details the activities that
the Task Area undertook to define and establish a DoD Cold War Project.
The Task Area began by identifying the types of cultural resources vital
to preserving DoD's Cold War historic legacy, and then discovering the
preservation and management issues that apply to them. Based upon those
investigations, the Task Area initiated several projects in late FY
1993.
Chapter II, "Cold War Historic Resources," describes Cold War
historic resource types. Following the Congressional charge to consider
the "physical and literary properties and relics" from the Cold War in
the United States and overseas, the chapter examines those resources in
terms of the existing legal or regulatory constraints, examples of
resource types, and preservation and management approaches to each
category.
Chapter III, "Conclusion and Recommendations," restates the Cold War
Task Area's position regarding the preservation and management of DoD
Cold War assets. It also suggests actions for preservation and
documentation of Cold War resources, and in respect to the future role
of the Cold War Project.
The Appendices satisfy several purposes. They provide information
regarding the Task Area's investigative process in establishing the Cold
War Project. They also list projects underway within and outside the
Department of Defense to define and study Cold War resources. Appendix
IV includes the existing guidance promulgated by the Departments of the
Air Force and Navy for treatment of Cold War historic resources.
Finally, a brief narrative history of the mission of DoD during the Cold
War and a chronology of Cold War events aim to place the cultural
resources from the Cold War (whose identification and potential methods
of treatment are the primary subjects of this Report) within the broad
historical context.
The Legacy Cold War Project
| In November 1989, the world watched in disbelief as citizens of a divided Germany reduced portions of the Berlin Wall to rubble. Shortly thereafter, that chilling symbol of American engagement in the Cold War the guard's hut from Checkpoint Charlie - was hoisted into the air, lowered onto a flatbed truck, and driven away. With the momentous reunification of Germany, then the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the Cold War seemed to be over. | ![]() This piece of the Berlin Wall - a
quintessential Cold War symbol - was transferred to Ramstein Air Base,
Germany, for public display. |
The end of the Cold War led the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) to
rethink its global commitments, and to reorganize, downsize, and
reallocate resources. The Department also seized the opportunity to
ensure that the record and meaning of its activities during the Cold War
are preserved while the evidence remains fresh. Such powerful reminders
of the Cold War as Checkpoint Charlie, pieces of the Berlin Wall, and
documents from the Soviet archives, will help future generations
understand the Cold War, its origins, and its repercussions. These and
other artifacts, documents, properties, and sites constitute a
significant and invaluable record of our national experience and, as
such, they merit consideration and protection.
Along with its other goals, the DoD Legacy Resource Management
Program addresses the meaning and preservation of DoD's Cold War
history. Established by the Defense Appropriations Act of 1991, the
Legacy Program fulfills the Congressional mandate to "determine
how to better integrate the conservation of irreplaceable biological,
cultural, and geophysical resources with the dynamic requirements of
military missions." It executes its charter through nine separate
purposes. Among them is the responsibility to "inventory, protect, and
conserve [DoD's] physical and literary property and relics" associated
with the origins and development of the Cold War at home and
abroad.1 This initiative is
being carried out by the Cold War Task Area.2
Like other Legacy Program task areas, the Cold War Task Area
conducts research and provides information to the Legacy Program, the
Department of Defense, and assorted partnership agencies and
institutions. Legacy activities also include demonstration projects,
which are designed to test needs against methodologies and offer models
for future efforts. Along with the sponsoring service's Legacy
coordinator, the Cold War Task Area manager is a consultant for some of
the Cold War-related demonstration projects. This Report discusses the
investigations of the Cold War Task Area, offers an overview of Cold War
cultural resources and the management approaches that may apply to them,
and makes recommendations for future Cold War preservation efforts.
At the outset, it is important to note the limitations of the Cold
War Task Area mandate. It does not pretend to set regulatory compliance
policies or practices for the Department of Defense. Rather, the Cold
War Task Area hopes to further discussion within DoD regarding
stewardship of its Cold War resources, and anticipates that its findings
will help the Department to determine the appropriate means for
preserving and protecting those assets.
Furthermore, the Task Area is not attempting to write a history of
the Cold War, and legislative language cautions the Legacy Program to
design a project that will not duplicate efforts "already being carried
out by other capable institutions or programs."3 The history and an analysis of
the roles and missions of the military departments and national security
agencies during the Cold War not only interest those within DoD, but
also academics, journalists, and policy makers. Consequently, many
individuals and institutions are already engaged in interpreting the
events of the past half-century. The Cold War Task Area has defined its
mission so as not to replicate their work. It focuses principally on
the physical properties and artifacts associated with the Cold War that
are found on DoD installations. The Task Area is also working to ensure
that documents that will be used to write future histories, and records
that relate to physical properties and artifacts from the Cold War, will
be retained and made available for study.
Although the Task Area is not writing a traditional history of the
Cold War, it will provide a historical context in order to facilitate
decision-making regarding cultural resources. Thus, a chief priority
among its investigations is the publication of context studies of weapon
systems and military functions, described in terms of their time, place,
and utility. As a start, Appendix V of this Report contains a very
brief discussion of the role of DoD and the military services during the
Cold War, and a chronology of international events from 1945 through
1991. Only against the backdrop of the historical imperatives that
defined the Cold War can the vast construction efforts, weapon system
development, and the worldwide deployment of military men and women be
understood.
The Task Area began its work in the fall of 1991 with a series of
meetings of professionals from several disciplines to consider issues
relating to DoD's management of its Cold War resources. Thereafter the
Task Area consulted the military history offices, installation
engineers, real property managers, public affairs specialists, and
environmental services officers. Investigators visited key Cold War
facilities and landscapes in the states of Alaska and Hawaii and in
Belgium, England, Germany, Japan, Korea, Okinawa, and Scotland. They
also toured selected installations in the continental United States.
|
Legacy Resource Management Program
|
Task area staff consulted State Historic Preservation Officers and
representatives of Federal agencies including the National Archives and
Records Administration, the National Park Service, the Smithsonian
Institution, the Department of State, the Department of Energy, the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration, the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, and the Central
Intelligence Agency (Appendix I). The Task Area staff also prepared a
selected bibliography (Appendix VI).
In summary, the Cold War Task Area accomplished the following:
|
§ Developed working definitions of historic resources
covered by the Cold War legislative mandate, i.e., physical and literary
properties and relics, with reference to standard definitions used by
the historic preservation and records management communities. § Surveyed current Cold War preservation activities conducted by
other responsible agencies and institutions (Appendix III). § Examined preservation and records management laws and regulations
applicable to Cold War-era resources. § Assessed overseas resources used or owned by the U.S. military
during the Cold War and their disposition. § Held a multi-agency Department of Defense-National Archives and
Records Administration Declassification Conference to determine the
current status of access to the documents of the Cold War and to offer
recommendations for improving access. § Co-sponsored a conference, Preserving the History of the Military Contracting Industry, with the National Archives and Records Administration and the Smithsonian Institution's National Air and Space Museum (NASM), that brought together defense contractors, DoD, and NARA, NASM, and former Department of Energy (DoE) experts to discuss the current status of records held by defense contractors and to encourage public access to those records. |
COLD WAR TASK AREA, FY 1993-1994
From its initial investigations, the Cold War Task Area learned that
much remains to be accomplished in order to "inventory, protect, and
conserve [DoD's] physical and literary property and relics" from the
Cold War. The Task Area has begun to develop data collection and
preservation-related activities, from a management-oriented perspective.
This newly accumulated information will redress some of the deficits in
our present knowledge and management capabilities. However, the Task
Area does not see its responsibilities solely in terms of commissioning
inventories and studies, immediate and vital as are those needs. It
also aims to serve as a clearinghouse for information and activities
relevant to DoD and the nation's stewardship of its Cold War cultural
resources.
Furthermore, although its work focuses specifically on protecting the
material culture of the Cold War, the Task Area will not neglect the
human resources. The Task Area expects to bring together active duty
and retired military members, scholars, and professionals from the
fields of history, the natural sciences, archaeology, planning, historic
preservation, archival sciences, museology, political science,
sociology, and international and environmental law, as well as citizens
who have curiosity about and commitment to understanding the complex
meaning of America's rich but harrowing recent past. A dispassionate
historical accounting is difficult when the events remain so close and
visceral. At the same time, the data from which to draw conclusions in
the future can never be recaptured fully once the people, places, and
objects are gone. The Cold War Project will link its collecting and
inventorying activities with the individuals and events that give them
meaning. It will relate the hard political decisions and the buildup of
nuclear arsenals and military hardware during the Cold War to the social
and psychological experiences of those who lived through the period.
The term "preservation," as it understood currently, is a flexible
concept. The preservation ethic extends beyond efforts to return an
artifact or structure to its original condition, and to maintain it in
that condition in perpetuity. The Cold War Task Area, in keeping with
the contemporary, broad approach to preservation, does not recommend
that all resources from the recent past be restored and saved in
pristine condition. At the same time, it strongly suggests that samples
of buildings, sites, weapons, ships, aircraft, tanks, military systems
and equipment, and other properties and objects that typify important
aspects of the DoD Cold War experience and military mission, be
considered for preservation, employing a range of accepted professional
practices as described in Chapter II. Frequently, this may mean
preservation of the historical record pertaining to an object or
structure in lieu of the thing itself. Preservation via the
historical record may be accomplished by traditional documentary
research, through oral and video histories, and by collecting measured
drawings, film, videotapes, and photographs. As a result, the scope of
representative activities of the American military during the Cold War
can be captured.
| In order to evaluate the significance of Cold War-era assets, the Task Area will undertake theme and context studies that identify resource types and describe their functions over time. Also, these studies will include an inventory of the resource base, since an evaluation of significance also requires a knowledge of the amount and physical condition of similar assets. With sufficient data in hand, the Department of Defense will be better equipped to set policy and write instructions for the treatment of its Cold War resources. | ![]() Holy Loch, Scotland, the site of a Navy nuclear submarine base closed in 1990. Submarine berths, support buildings, and housing are no longer used, but the activities of the base have been documented for the historical record. |
Along with its activities directed at the preservation and management
of Cold War-related physical properties and artifacts, the Task Area is
concerned with collection and access to defense and national security
records. Much of the history of the period, and the uses and
modifications of its material culture, can be substantiated most
directly through the written record. Since these documents must be
preserved and made available for study, the Task Area will continue to
emphasize the importance of declassification and proper records
management.
In keeping with Congressional requirements, the Cold War Project is
also directed to study American resources overseas. It must be recalled
that traditionally the United States retreated into isolationism during
peacetime. However, the country emerged from World War II as a
superpower, a role it played on a global scale during the ensuing years.
Because of the significance of the United States' dominant geopolitical
position during the Cold War, the Task Area will explore further the
effects of alliances and international relations on U.S. military
activities during the period.
The activities by which the Cold War Task Area is fulfilling its
mandate, beginning in the fall of 1993, are as follows:
THEME AND CONTEXT STUDIES. The Task Area has begun studies on
selected themes or topics related to military activities during the Cold
War.4 Themes, or more
narrowly focused topics that relate to them, on such critical military
functions as offensive and defensive missions, testing, training, space,
intelligence, research and development, technological change, and
international activities, will be illustrated in terms of sites,
structures, weapon systems, artifacts, and the documentary record.
These studies will draw upon the expertise of DoD historians and
historians of technology, cultural resource and real property managers,
State Historic Preservation Officers, curators and collections managers,
records and information specialists, operators, and others knowledgeable
about a particular subject.
In late FY 1993, the Cold War Task Area initiated two studies: the
DoD Guided Missile Program study and the Germany Cold War study. During
the Cold War, the Army, Navy, and Air Force developed missile systems as
major implements of strategic deterrence and for defense. The missile
study will provide a historical overview and an elaboration of site
selection, facility construction, research and development components,
modifications, and deployment of guided missile systems by the military
services. The Army and Air Force missile programs overlapped in some
respects, but the Navy's procurement methods and deployment were unique.
Therefore, land- and sea-based systems will be treated separately, at
least for purposes of research.
The facilities built or leased by the United States in Germany (the
military and political
dividing line between East and West) during the Cold War, and the
activities that took place on these posts and air bases, are the subject
of the Germany Cold War studies. The first of these studies will be a
substantial photographic essay and an exhibition on Berlin, the city
that was the symbolic linchpin of American engagement in the Cold War.
Both the photo publication and the exhibition will describe and
illustrate activities and events that took place in Berlin, including
Clay headquarters, barracks, Tempelhof Airport, and other sites and
facilities used by Americans during the occupation and through the
ensuing Cold War years. These commemorations of the American military
presence on the front line during the Cold War have immediate historical
resonance, since closing ceremonies marking troop withdrawals take place
in early September 1994.
SURVEY. The Cold War Task Area is assisting DoD's cultural resource
managers who are surveying Cold War historic resources in the United
States and abroad by overseeing survey pilot projects.5 As a first step, a survey of
existing and dismantled missile sites will be integrated into the theme
study. It will include detailed information about the number, type,
modifications, deployment, and deactivation of missiles in the DoD
inventory during the Cold War. It will specify what remains, how many,
and in what condition, thereby aiding DoD and other agencies as they
make preservation decisions.
The Cold War Task Area also contributed to an effort whereby teams
from the U.S. Army Center of Military History Museum Division surveyed
Army historic artifacts at various sites in Germany (Appendix II). That
inventory will add substantially to the Germany Cold War studies and
once again allows DoD to make informed collection and conservation
decisions.
MANAGEMENT GUIDELINES. Many caretakers at DoD installations,
particularly those at bases that are closing, are anxious for specific
guidance regarding the management and preservation of their Cold War
assets. This Report is only a first step in that direction insofar as
it describes general types of Cold War cultural resources, the existing
preservation requirements under law, and possible preservation options.
The Task Area anticipates that more detailed studies will contribute
invaluable information and suggest methodologies that DoD cultural
resource managers can use to develop criteria and procedures for
identifying, evaluating, and protecting Cold War material culture. To
that end, it hopes to develop, beginning in FY 1995, concurrent with
theme study research, a data base that will serve as the basis for
determining rarity, condition, and significance of important Cold War
structures, artifacts, and archives.
The Cold War Task Area has, in the short run, contributed to interim
guidelines for the preservation and management of Cold War resources
that have been distributed to Air Force installations. On November 9,
1992, representatives of the Task Area attended a Navy-sponsored
cultural resource conference at which participants deliberated
strategies for the management of World War II and Cold War-era historic
structures. As a result of those discussions, the Air Combat Command
historic preservation officer wrote interim guidelines for the treatment
of Cold War historic properties on Air Force lands (Appendix IV). Those
guidelines, drafted with input from the Task Area and cultural resource
managers from other military departments, have been distributed
throughout the Air Force and may, in time, be broadened to encompass all
DoD installations.
In late FY 1994 the Task Area will begin to draw together and
circulate reports of field studies of Cold War resources. This
information network will engage cultural resource professionals in
exchanges regarding their methodologies, management problems, and
results.
RECORDS MANAGEMENT. In 1992, the Cold War Task Area chaired a
conference on records declassification.6 The Task Area has continued to
address declassification issues by monitoring policy initiatives by a
Task Force charged by a Presidential Review Directive with drafting a
new national security policy, and by a DoD/CIA Task Force reviewing
security practices at the DoD and the CIA.7 The Cold War Task Area is
supported in this effort by the Director of the National Coordinating
Committee for the Promotion of History.
Also, the Cold War Task Area assisted a 1993 Legacy declassification
demonstration project at the Naval Historical Center (Appendix II), and
initiated discussion of a joint service effort to develop and
demonstrate electronic record keeping as an aid to restoring and
declassifying historical records.
COLLECTIONS MANAGEMENT. The Cold War Task Area is consulting with
DoD museum staffs and other appropriate agencies and organizations
regarding museum collections policies and curatorial techniques. The
Task Area Manager will coordinate with demonstration projects concerned
with museum collections and curation (Appendix II).
As mentioned above, the Task Area and the U.S. Army Center of
Military History have collaborated to produce a travelling exhibition on
American forces in Berlin during the Cold War. It will open in Berlin
at the time of closing ceremonies in September 1994 and will circulate
thereafter.
INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES. To contribute to widespread contemporary
interest in the Cold War from the perspective of the "other side," the
Legacy Program has sponsored an International Conference on Cold War
History and Records; scholarly exchanges between former Soviet and
American specialists; a project to locate, and possibly retrieve,
Judaica artifacts confiscated during the Holocaust and kept in Communist
bloc countries during the Cold War; and a Smithsonian Institution
exhibition on Soviet-U.S. relations during the Cold War (Appendix
II).
One of the Task Area's initial studies details the American presence
in Germany, and the Task Area expects to commission other studies on
international military activities. An investigation of Cold War
intelligence gathering, for instance, would necessarily describe the
worldwide tracking of Soviet activities.
The Cold War Task Area manager sits on a newly formed DoD Cold War
Historical Committee, which will assist in the development of feasible
international projects. The Committee will direct its first efforts at
building upon relationships between representatives from NATO and former
Warsaw Pact countries that grew out of the Legacy-sponsored
International Cold War Conference held in March 1994.8 Beginning in late FY 1994, the
DoD Cold War Historical Committee will work with the Task Area to
initiate a professional exchange program, and possible translations of
Cold War foreign-language materials from the Eastern bloc.
Cold War Historic Resources
| § The B-52 manned bomber, the mainstay of the Air Force's strategic bombardment mission during the Cold War, increasingly left the inventory as individual airplanes reached the end of their structural life. B-52s still perform combat missions, but the aircraft is coming to be seen as historic, typifying the military role during the Cold War. | ![]() HAWK missile site in Key West, Fla., closed in 1979. It remains abandoned and unused. |
§ In keeping with arms control
agreements with the former Soviet Union, many B-52s are being cut up,
and a small number has become static displays at Air Force bases and
aerospace museums around the nation.
§ In 1990 the Navy left Holy Loch Naval Support Activity, a base
originally dedicated to Fleet Ballistic Missile boats. Submarine
tenders at this facility near Dunoon, Scotland, serviced the American
submarines that prowled the North Atlantic in search of their Soviet
counterparts, and the Polaris and Poseidon nuclear submarines that
patrolled in support of the Navy's deterrence mission. Today all of the
shore facilities are in Scottish hands, boarded up and awaiting sale.
The last tender has been refitted and reassigned to the up an awaiting
sale. The last tender has been refitted and reassigned to the
Mediterranean, with female sailors now part of her crew.
§ The Army built a HAWK missile site in Key West, Florida, as
a link in the defensive perimeter it constructed during the Cold War.
The anti-aircraft facility, unusual because it was built as a permanent
installation, was intended to guard against attack from Cuba, 90 miles
away. In 1979 it closed and, although the property continues to be
maintained by the Naval Air Station, Boca Chica Field, to date no new
use has been found for the facility. It sits abandoned, collecting rust
and graffiti.
|
Definitions of Terms Cultural Resource: Any real or personal property, record, or
lifeway that can be defined as follows: Historic or Pre-Historic Real Property: Any archeological or
architectural district, site, building, structure, or object, as well as
monuments, designed landscapes, works of engineering, or other property
that may meet the criteria for inclusion in the National Register of
Historic Places or an equivalent register maintained by a State or local
government or agency. Historic Personal Property: Any artifact, relic of battle
experience or other military activity, piece of military equipment,
weapon, article of clothing, flag, work of art, movable object, or other
item of personal property to which historical or cultural significance
may be ascribed through professional evaluation of historical
associations to persons, events, places, eras, or with military
organizations. Historic Records: Any historical, oral-historical,
ethnographic, architectural, or other document that may provide a record
of the past, whether associated with real property or not, as determined
through professional evaluation of the information content and
significance of the information. Community Resources/Lifeways: Any resource to which a
community, such as a neighborhood or Indian tribe, or a community of
interest, such as a preservation organization or veterans' group, may
ascribe cultural value. Such resources may include historic real and
personal property, such as natural landscapes and cemeteries, or have
references to real property, such as vistas or viewsheds which may help
define a historic real property, or may have no real property reference,
such as aspects of folklife, cultural or religious practices, language,
or traditions Environment: The aggregate of social, cultural, biological
and geophysical conditions that influence the life or condition of a
resource, community, people or lifeway. Sensitive: Highly responsive or susceptible to intrinsic
modifications by external agents or influences. Significant: Essential to understanding the meaning of some
larger element, e.g. in the significance of a single building to a
historic theme, or the significance of a single species of plant life to
a community. Stewardship: The faithful management of resources as assets which must be turned over to the next generation. |
Many such weapon systems, structures, sites, and equipment, so
crucial to carrying out the military mission during the Cold War, are no
longer in service. Some were retired because they became worn out or
technologically obsolete. Others closed because the end of the Cold War
reduced the need for a sizable military force and extensive surveillance
of Eastern bloc countries. Still others shut down in response to
changing political events, foreign and domestic. Yet these
three-dimensional pieces of history graphically illustrate elements of
the American military mission, including the evolution of its
technologies, international alliances, strategies, and tactics during
the Cold War.
In keeping with the Legacy Program's enabling legislation, Cold
War-related historic resources described in this Report are physical
properties (sites, structures, and landscapes), literary properties
(information and documents), relics (objects), and cultural resources
overseas. Each is examined below.
Physical properties and relics (hereafter the terms "objects" and
"artifacts" are used instead of "relics") are not necessarily
discrete types of material culture. However, they are discussed
separately because the Legacy legislative language names them
individually, and because the relevant legal frameworks and
administrative and management requirements for them often differ.
Internationally based Cold War resources include the other types, but
because unique factors apply to preservation of U.S. military facilities
overseas, they too are discussed separately.
Physical properties - sites, structures, and landscapes - help to
tell the story of the military presence at home and abroad. The
physical evidence of Cold War defense activities remains on military
landscapes from San Diego to Diego Garcia and from Honolulu to
Heidelberg. Many Cold War installations date from earlier periods and
are layered with history - reaching back, in some cases, to the American
Revolution. In comparison to older, often revered reminders of our
heritage, more contemporary properties are frequently thought to be of
lesser value and, consequently, are especially vulnerable when bases
close and drawdowns occur. Some are ignored because of their physical
location on minor installations far from main bases, forts, or stations.
Obsolescence, maintenance difficulties, and lack of conservation
facilities hinder the successful management of others. In addition,
lingering national security concerns effectively limit access to
classified information and, in some cases, entire installations
remain off-limits. Finally, limited federal control over the objects
and documents spawned by private industry's research and development
projects under DoD contracts, and a lack of awareness within private
industry of their potential historical value, restrict the flow of
information about the military's Cold War assets.
![]() |
Laws and Regulations
DoD cultural resource managers can draw upon an existing body of
law, regulation, and practice as they begin to evaluate resources for
historic significance. The National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of
1966 (as amended), defines "historic property" or "historic resource" to
mean "any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure,
or object included in, or eligible for inclusion on the National
Register; including artifacts, records and material remains related to
such a property or resource."9
A common misunderstanding holds that requirements stemming from
the Act only apply to properties more than 50 years old. However, the
National Register criteria for evaluation found at 36 CFR 60.4 states
that ordinarily a property that has achieved significance within the
past 50 years shall not be considered eligible for the National Register
unless it is of exceptional importance. Approximately 3 percent of the
properties in the National Register of Historic Places were listed
before they reached 50 years of age, with missiles and nuclear
facilities, in the case of military properties, having received the
greatest attention. For instance, the X-10 Reactor at Oak Ridge
National Energy Laboratory, Launch Complex 33 at White Sands Missile
Range, a Thor space launch complex at Vandenberg Air Force Base, several
launch pads and the mission control center at Cape Canaveral, and Launch
Complex 39 at the Kennedy Space Center are among the Cold War assets
currently in the National Register. Others, such as a Minuteman II ICBM
system at Ellsworth Air Force Base, have been determined to be eligible.
Still others appear to be potentially eligible, such as SAC
headquarters and alert facilities, the "Looking Glass" 24-hour airborne
command post, and numerous testing and training facilities at Vandenberg
Air Force Base. The National Park Service has published technical
instructions for the evaluation of contemporary resources, Guidelines
for Evaluating and Nominating Properties That Have Achieved Significance
Within the Last Fifty Years.10
|
Sites: Districts: Buildings: Structures: Landscapes: Objects: |
Programmatic agreements for facility planning and management are one
means by which DoD has met compliance requirements of the NHPA.
Programmatic agreements are developed among an agency, the State
Historic Preservation Officer, and the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation. They may apply to an installation, to a particular
structure type such as Nike missile sites or regional communication
facilities, or to a nation-wide endeavor. As an example, the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers, New England District, negotiated a Programmatic
Agreement in October 1991 which required the Corps to provide a map of
Nike sites on areas under review by the Defense Environmental
Restoration Pro ram, conduct an inventory of Nike-associated structures,
prepare a National Register Multiple Property Documentation Form, and
select and document one representative Nike site to HAER standards.
These actions were undertaken in consultation with State Historic
Preservation Officers.
A legal impediment to the preservation of Cold War weapon systems
comes from the provisions set forth in arms limitation treaties.11 Generally these treaties
permit the retention of a small number of weapons for historical
purposes and specify modifications to the hardware involved. A notable
example is Titan II Missile Site 8, since May 1986 the home of the Titan
Missile Museum in Green Valley, Arizona. It is the only existing Titan
II launch facility that was operational during the Cold War. The site
consists of restored above and below ground facilities and equipment of
the U.S. Air Force Titan II Intercontinental Ballistic Missile Site
Number 8 (571-7) of the 571st Strategic Missile Squadron, 390th
Strategic Missile Wing, headquartered at Davis Monthan Air Force Base,
Tucson, Arizona, from 1962 to 1984. The missile is an authentic Titan
II ICBM used for training. Original modifications to the site,
complying with treaty requirements, included cutting holes in the launch
duct to allow for satellite viewing for 30 days and inserting a
multi-ton cement block in the silo closure door to prop it open
permanently.12
|
Abandoned Shipwreck Act 43 U.S.C. §§ 2101-2106 American Indian Religious Freedom Act 42 U.&C. § 1996, §
1996 note Antiquities Act 16 U.S.C §§ 431-433 Archeological and Historical Data Preservation Act 16 U.S.C. §§
469-469c Archeological Resources Protection Act 16 U.S.C. §§
470aa-470mm Historic Sites Act 16 U.S.C. §§ 461-467 National Historic Preservation Act 16 U.S.C. §§ 470-470w-6 Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act 25 U.S.C.A. §§ 3001-3013 |
Management and Preservation Issues and Approaches
The Legacy Cold War Task Area does not urge DoD to extend
National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) protection to all Cold War
properties. It does believe, however, that other means of safeguarding
these resources besides the legal requirements associated with National
Register listing should be considered for representative properties and
objects of recent history.
The evaluation criteria set forth for National Register nominations
are, nonetheless, useful in thinking about historical value. The
criteria call attention to properties associated with events that have
made a contribution to broad historical patterns, those associated with
lives of significant persons, those that embody "distinctive
characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction" or that
"represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may
lack individual distinction," and those that have or might yield
important historical information.13 Properties owned by DoD
might, for example, be valuable because of their technological
associations or their connection with the military mission. Moreover,
their importance should be considered on the state and local as well as
on the national level.
![]() |
As part of the process of determining historical value, Cold War
resources should be broadly catalogued according to property type and
function. Then a series of questions can be asked, such as: How central
were they to the military mission? How many were developed or
constructed? How much did the Defense Department invest in them? Does
a site or structure retain historical integrity? What, and where, are
similar or equivalent properties? If, after research is completed,
authorities decide that a particular site, structure, or landscape does
not merit preservation, its purposes, design, and use will have been
documented before it is modified for other uses or destroyed.
Recently completed studies of the communications/surveillance systems
that dot the landscape of Alaska offer examples of steps in or
approaches to the process of evaluation and preservation
decision-making. In the 1950s, the United States began construction of
an extensive defensive network in Alaska to warn of an attack launched
from the Soviet mainland. The technology of the time required a wide
distribution of radar and communication stations. As technologies
improved, the network consolidated into a handful of facilities that
served the same purpose at lower cost and with fewer personnel.14
This far-flung communications system stretching across our
northern borders turned Alaska into a time capsule of the technological
evolution of America's first line of defense during the Cold War. Over
the years, many sites have been abandoned or scheduled for demolition;
others are to be upgraded or modified to serve different purposes. Some
are undergoing environmental restoration. Although these changes have
and will continue to occur, extensive information regarding the use and
location of these Cold War systems is retained through a U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers survey of Army and Air Force weapon systems and
installations in the state (Appendix III). This data base will provide
the necessary inventory for any future discussion regarding the
retention of a particular site or facility.
Another project pertaining to the Alaskan defense network, a study of
the White Alice Communications System that was completed in 1988,
illustrates the cooperative nature of historic preservation activities.
When the Alaska Air Command scheduled the White Alice sites for
demolition, it was determined that they might be eligible for the
National Register. The command and the Alaska State Historic
Preservation Officer signed an agreement, with the acceptance of the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, to produce a historical
overview of the system, an inventory of 19 White Alice sites, a
statement of significance of the system, a map locating the sites in
Alaska, and a bibliography of non-classified material relating to the
system. After the documentation was completed, most sites were
demolished.15
Physical properties, particularly those associated with
military activities, seldom remain untouched over time. The term
"continuity of use" refers to facilities whose essential function
remains the same despite changes, modifications, and upgrades made to
them.16 The significance
of many Cold War resources that have been modified and reused lies in
their function rather than their original historic integrity. The
history of their evolution can be captured through records research,
photographic studies, oral histories, or measured drawings tracing the
stages of change of the structure, site, or landscape.
A well-established, albeit comprehensive and expensive, model for the
documentation of structures and sites comes from the Historic American
Buildings Survey and the Historic American Engineering Record
(HABS/HAER) of the National Park Service. Numerous DoD sites around the
country have been recorded, including some from the Cold War.17 Drawings and photographs
provide analyses of sites and their changing use. Other types of
documentation are oral and video histories, such as the Smithsonian
Archives Videohistory Project whose videotapes include nuclear pioneers
on site describing their work, the RAND Corporation's monographs, and
the Naval Research Laboratory's recordation of rocketry and
photo-reconnaissance.18
As stated above, evaluation of significance hinges upon the
identification of number and types of resources as well as on physical
condition and intrinsic historical value. Depending upon the purpose
and scope of a project, different methodologies may be used to
conduct surveys of Cold War resources.
§ A thematic approach has been used by the National Historic
Landmark program to identify sites of national significance. For
example, studies have addressed a broad theme, such as medicine or man
in space, and a nation-wide survey identified existing resources of
national significance that relate to the theme. Although this survey
methodology may be useful for identifying Cold War resource types across
the nation, it does not take into account the significance of a resource
in state and local terms.
| § The National Register Multiple Property Nomination survey approach looks at groups of specific resources related by one or more elements, such as architectural style, historical event (i.e., mobilization for Vietnam), historically significant persons, or subject (i.e., weapon laboratories). Survey boundaries can be as narrow as an installation or as broad as a state, region, city, or country, or an era of history (Cold War). Once related buildings or structures are identified, they are evaluated further according to specific local, state, or national significance, as well as historical integrity, including physical condition and modifications. The goal is to reduce the number of buildings deemed significant, in order to responsibly and economically preserve the most appropriate representatives of the type. | ![]() HABS drawing of the Vertical Wind Tunnel at Wright-Patterson
AFB, OH, is a sample of a proven, long-standing documentation
approach. |
These and other approaches have been used in surveys of DoD
properties. For example, the Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska district,
conducted its survey along Multiple Property principles. It categorized
Army and Air Force resources in Alaska by property type: interceptor
airfields, intelligence airfields, DEW line, White Alice Communication
System, Ballistic Missile Early Warning System, LORAN, and others.
Working from a different perspective, a Legacy demonstration project at
the University of South Carolina developed a methodology useful for
surveying Cold War military assets in the state. It catalogues
resources according to function: offense, defense, training, research
and development, and others. DoD cultural resource managers should
choose a survey methodology suitable to individual needs, funding and
staff resources, and time constraints.
Once a finding of historical significance is made, an informed
decision regarding preservation is possible. The options for treatment
of Cold War-era historic resources may include any of the following:
DoD regulations do not contain a definition of objects that applies
to all the military departments. Rather, each service provides its own
definition spelled out within its museum regulations. In the absence of
a single body of instruction governing museums and objects, the Cold War
Task Area follows the American Association of Museums (AAM) definition
of "tangible objects" as those with "intrinsic value to science,
history, art, or culture." When these objects - aircraft, tanks, ships,
navigation equipment, bombsights, training devices, uniforms, models,
etc. - form a museum's collections, they may "reflect, in both scope and
significance, the museum's stated purpose."19
Laws and Regulations
Congress has established the legal framework for records
management under the Federal Records Act (FRA) and for the preservation
of significant sites, structures, and landscapes under NHPA. However,
federal law is less specific in regards to the inventory, protection,
and conservation of Federal objects.20
Nonetheless, some historic preservationists and curators
consider large objects such as aircraft, missiles, and ships to be
"structures" that are subject to historic preservation laws and must be
evaluated for eligibility for nomination to the National Register of
Historic Places. Several Navy vessels from the Cold War are listed in
the National Register. The U.S.S. Nautilus, for example, the
first nuclear submarine, dating from 1954, was retired to the Submarine
Museum in Groton, Connecticut, in 1986. It is one of only two
non-commissioned ships in the Navy assigned a commissioned crew. The
crew is responsible for maintenance, preservation, monitoring systems,
and security.21
![]() |
By and large, however, the Department of Defense has not considered
large objects or weapon systems to be "structures" subject to National
Register eligibility under Federal preservation law. As stated in a May
1988 General Accounting Office report, Aircraft Preservation:
Preserving DoD Aircraft Significant to Aviation History, DoD took
the position that only those aircraft maintained in their historic
settings were appropriate National Register candidates. Therefore,
aircraft housed in museums are ineligible for the Register.22
This thinking too is evolving. A National Register
Bulletin currently in draft, partially funded through the Legacy
Program, discusses the criteria in the context of aviation. Civil
aviation structures and some aircraft are already listed, and insofar as
the Bulletin will provide greater recognition of historic
aviation properties, it may encourage DoD to reconsider National
Register listing.23
|
Navy: OPNAV (Office of the Chief of Naval Operations)
Instruction 5750.13 identifies the curator for the Navy (director of
Naval History) as manager of the Navy's historical properties; OPNAV
Instruction 5755.1A provides policy to Navy commands with existing
museums and guidance to those interested in establishing new
museums. |
Museum Administration
Just as DoD has not issued Department-wide regulations defining
"artifacts" and specifying rules for their preservation, neither has it
issued directives outlining museum practices on an inter-service basis.
According to Col. A.J. Ponnwitz, Head, Museums Branch, US Marine Corps,
"all museums share common concerns relating to compliance with local,
state, and federal regulations, particularly regarding the environment,
safety, access for the disabled, fund raising, and so forth." Yet,
"each museum is focused as well to its specific concerns." Col. Richard
Uppstrom, Director of the USAF Museum, adds: "Me several services of the
DoD have already made significant progress [in preservation], although
each has done so in their own way with little or at best informal
coordination."24
Professional standards at military museums are far from
uniform. Some, such as the Army's Air Defense Artillery Museum, Fort
Bliss, Texas; the Women's Army Corps Museum, Fort McClellan, Alabama;
the U.S. Army Quartermaster Museum at Fort Lee, Virginia; and the U.S.
Navy Museum in Washington, D.C., are accredited by the AAM and,
therefore, meet the minimum national professional guidelines for museum
practices. Some major museums, such as the Naval Aviation Museum at
Pensacola, Florida; the Hampton Roads Naval Museum, Norfolk, Virginia;
and the U.S. Air Force Museum at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio,
are not AAM-accredited, but appear to meet the professional guidelines
for staff, funding, and facilities. Beyond these outstanding examples,
however, the standards for managing and caring for tangible objects in
the services vary widely.25
The Army's museum system, which spans the world, is
administered by the U.S. Army Center of Military History (CMH) in
Washington, D.C. Centralization allows the system to function under
relatively standardized procedures. Effectively, however, operational
control for Army museums resides in the major commands (MACOMS).26
In February 1994, the Office of the Air Force Historian assumed
policy and guidance responsibilities for the USAF Museum System. The
U.S. Air Force Museum located at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base serves
as the point of contact for museum activities throughout the service.
Daily operation of local museums largely falls to major commands
(MAJCOMS).27
The U.S. Navy Museum, located at the Navy Yard in Washington,
D.C., comes under the jurisdiction of the Naval Historical Center.
Effectively, local museums report to local commands rather than to the
Naval Historical Center. The decentralized organization of the museums
is designed to "validate the requirement for these museums at the local
level and to assure that they are responsible to the requirements of
their parent commands and communities."28
The cultural and historical collections of the US Marine Corps
are administered by the Museums Branch of the History and Museums
Division, Headquarters Marine Corps. The Museums Branch operates two
museums and there are four additional Command museums throughout the
Corps.29
Collections Management Issues and Approaches
DoD museums hold large collections of Cold War-era objects and
have in the Past and plan in the future to mount exhibitions on the
Korean and Vietnam Wars, and on other Cold War-related themes. In
addition to artifacts on view in museums, the services have airparks and
outdoor displays throughout the world. The Army's Aberdeen Proving
Grounds showcases United States and Soviet tanks in use through the Cold
War period. The National Museum of Naval Aircraft in Pensacola,
Florida, has an extensive collection of naval aircraft dating from the
earliest days of naval aviation. The aircraft are displayed outdoors
and in covered, protected facilities. The USAF Museum in Dayton, Ohio,
has a vast collection of Army Air Corps and Air Force aircraft. A large
number are kept in the hangars that serve as museum galleries, while
others are outside. One of the most serious conservation issues for all
service museums is the lack of adequate climate-controlled storage and
display space for collections, especially for large objects such as
aircraft.
At present there is no single DoD-wide data base of Cold War-related
artifacts, which would prove useful in mounting exhibitions and for
evaluating the number and significance of objects from the period that
have been or should be collected. There are, however, service-based
projects that are responding to this need. Army museum regulations, for
example, include a suggested classification system for cataloguing
artifacts, which might be expanded to track Cold War-era objects.30 A Legacy demonstration project
at the Naval Historical Center is constructing an automated data base
with descriptive, accountability, and location data on Navy art and
artifacts from World War II and the Cold War era. The USAF Museum
maintains a complete inventory of its holdings.
Many collection decisions are dictated by considerations of
availability and cost, too few, outside the flagship museums, by a
coherent collections policy drafted by professional staff. As an
example of the latter, in 1972, working toward an exhibition that would
include aircraft used by each of the services during the Vietnam War,
curators from the Smithsonian Institution's Air and Space Museum
determined that one of each of the great variety of aircraft flown could
not reasonably be obtained or cared for. As part of Project Update,
they prepared a list of the 12 most important types of aircraft, as well
as those airplanes associated with influential events or people. They
began building their collection around that list and, after nearly two
decades, it is almost complete - from the last jet bomber to leave
Vietnam (the Martin B-57B Canberra) to the "Jolly Green Giant" rescue
helicopter (Sikorsky HH-3H).31
![]() |
Management options for treating Cold War-era objects, both
large and small, may include any of the following:
|
§ Preservation in a museum, removed from the original physical
context. § On-site interpretation, through written and visual display, in the
original physical context. § Display and interpretation on the same installation, such
as a visitors' center or museum. § Drawings, technical materials, or scale models instead of the object, in a visitor's center or installation museum.32 |
Federally generated records, regardless of format, are protected by
the Federal Records Act33 as administered by the
National Archives and Records Administration. Federal records managers
create specific agency guidelines to manage the retention, dispersal,
and disposal of federal records. Federal records managers comply with
the requirements for safeguarding national security information
according to Executive Order 12356.34 These guidelines do not,
however, encompass all Cold War-era records that relate to government or
national security interests that are Federally generated and maintained,
or held by public or private entities. (Private holdings include
university archives and defense-related industries that contracted with
DoD).35
|
Textual Records Non-Textual Records |
The Cold War Task Area has not restricted its investigations to
records covered by FRA, but has considered a broad cross-section of
literary properties that describe American military activities and
materiel. They may be the types of documents usually cited in published
military and diplomatic histories, such as reports, correspondence,
memos, budget statements, policy papers, maps, and photographs. They
may be nontextual materials such as engineering drawings or building
specifications for real property. Together they offer evidence of the
history of military roles and missions and the design, construction,
management, maintenance, and alterations of Cold War sites, structures,
landscapes, and artifacts. Directly or indirectly, these records may
also document social issues such as race relations, gender roles, and
the support of families. While a great number of records are held by
government agencies or retired to the National Archives because they are
protected under federal law, others are privately held with fewer legal
protections.
Published Histories of the Cold War
DoD historical offices research Cold War-era topics as a matter
of course even though some of the studies were not conceived
specifically as Cold War histories. For example, the Joint Staff
History Office series, The Joint Chiefs of Staff and National Policy,
concerns the Cold War era, when the Joint Chiefs of Staff was
created. Similarly, many studies from the Center for Air Force History
cover the period since the Air Force became an independent military
department during the Cold War. Publications of timely interest include
Jacob Neufeld, Ballistic Missiles in the United States Air Force,
1945-1960, and Kenneth Schaffel, The Emerging Shield: The
Air Force and the Evolution of Continental Air Defense, 1945-1960.
The U.S. Army Center of Military History is planning a series of
Cold War history volumes; the first is already underway. It has a
lengthy publication list of other materials relating to the
period.36 The Naval
Historical Center, Contemporary History Branch, holds seminars and
publishes monographs, many of which concern Cold War events. The Office
of History, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, is working on two Cold
War-related volumes: Building for Peace: A History of the Europe
Division, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and Its Predecessor
Agencies, 1945-1991 and History of the Mediterranean and Middle
East Divisions, 1952-1991.37
|
Statutes Regulations |
Declassification
With the end of the Cold War, a rethinking of the American system
of classification - itself an artifact of the Cold War - is taking
place. According to the director of the Information Security Oversight
Office, General Services Administration, which administers the
classification system, "We have a finite number of real secrets. We
could declassify thousands of documents with the declassification of a
single secret."38
As of the date of this Report, the system to declassify
national security records is hopelessly clogged. The National Archives
estimates that it alone currently holds 130,000 cubic feet or 325
million pages of records containing classified information. At the
current rate and methods for review, if no further classified records
were acquired, the declassification process would take 8 to 10 years.
This estimate does not include those records still in the custody of DoD
and national security agencies.39
Reconsideration of classification procedures is currently
underway. On April 26, 1993, the Clinton administration issued a
Presidential Review Directive (PRD) on the system of national security
information classification (embodied in Executive Order 12356 of April
6,1982). The PRD ordered a sweeping review of Cold War-era rules on
government secrecy with the intent of reducing the number of highly
classified military and intelligence programs. It set up an interagency
task force to draft new rules on classification of national security
information through a revised Executive Order.
The PRD was followed by the establishment, on May 26, 1993, of the
Joint Security Commission, charged with a comprehensive review of the
security practices and procedures under the authorities of the director
of the CIA and the Secretary of Defense. The commission's
recommendations and implementing actions are intended to improve those
security practices and procedures in concert with the President's new
Executive Order on national security issues.
Documents held by military history offices are generally declassified
both in response to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests
(mandatory review) and as part of the systematic review recommended in
Executive Order 12356. The production of non-classified service
histories from classified documents leads occasionally to
declassification of records, but most often to unclassified publications
that have drawn from non-sensitive portions of classified documents.
The military services have projects underway specifically to
declassify Cold War records. In addition to Project SAFE PAPER, which
declassifies 500 linear feet of Cold War-era documents per year, the Air
Force has assigned a special unit to declassify records relating to the
conflict in Southeast Asia at the rate of 600 linear feet per year. The
Army has also given priority to the declassification of documents from
the Vietnam War. In addition, the Army is seeking the help of NARA to
determine appropriate disposition for its electronic records, which
include some 200,000 computer tapes of currently unavailable material.
The Navy is conducting a Legacy demonstration project to develop an
economical and expeditious method for declassifying Cold War-era
records. The Navy is also declassifying Cold War-era materials in the
regular course of business.
Once records have been transferred to the National Archives or
otherwise retired, researchers may still be denied access to them
because the records have not been declassified. In fact, the majority
of Cold War documentation and much other DoD material remains classified
and accessible only with difficulty due to the complexities of the Cold
War-era declassification process, and the sheer number of documents
awaiting classification review.40
In accordance with Executive Order 12356, the National Archives
is required to systematically review for declassification national
security classified records in its possession that are more than 30
years old. Where systematic review cannot respond to urgent requests
for information, a mandatory review takes place. The actual
declassification guidelines are provided by the originating agency,
which often reserve the ability to determine the classification status
of certain types of information.41
Documents eligible for systematic review are considered for
declassification according to NARA priorities, including intrinsic
research interest and declassifiability. For example, if the
originating agency has not provided guidance, or if less than 80 percent
of the records are declassifiable because of continuing sensitivity, the
National Archives may choose to apply its resources elsewhere.42
Systematic review procedures generally employ one of two
methods. The first, page-by-page review, is a slow and labor-intensive
process that often requires sending documents back to the originating
agency. The second, bulk declassification, is based on an examination
of a sample of the records.
The mandatory review process is routinely used to respond to requests
for current records under the Freedom of Information Act.43 While bulk
declassification can be employed, FOIA requests often require the
excision by hand of still-classified portions. In addition, mandatory
review is often the only resort for researchers interested in records
considered low priority for systematic review by the National Archives
or for which agency guidance has not been written.44
Records Held by Government Contractors
Under the provisions of FRA, the National Archives promulgates
standards and guidelines for the management of records generated by
federal agencies. The National Archives has only limited authority to
accept records generated by non-federal entities. Standard government
contracts specify which documents produced by a contractor in
fulfillment of a contract must be delivered to the contracting agency.
Once delivered, these records become part of the agency's records and,
as such, are subject to federal appraisal and disposition
procedures.45
Some records and artifacts, such as models and test project
material generated by research and development efforts, are at risk for
loss or disposal because they are not contractually obligated to the
federal government. Some may be of proprietary value to the contractor
but may be discarded when they have no economic value or usefulness, or
when patent protection is moot, even though they are historically
valuable.46
Contractors may transfer records to the federal government via
the federal contracting agency, which may eventually transfer them to
the National Archives. Contractors may donate other records "that
provide evidence as to the function of government" to the National
Archives, subject to the approval of the Archivist of the United States.
While the National Archives cannot and should not accept donation of
all records from all federal contractors, the latter should be
encouraged to preserve their own archives.47
Rights and data clauses, which appear in virtually all research
and development contracts, yield documentation that some contractors
consider a costly nuisance even though historians consider them to be
valuable primary sources.48 In addition, since the
General Accounting Office retains the right to inspect DoD-related
records held by contractors until three years after final payment,
contractors try to limit the number of records retained in order to
minimize the likelihood of a DoD records inspection.49
Some contractor records are subject to federal regulations.
For example, government-owned, contractor-operated (GOCO) facilities
have generated large collections of documents that are retained by the
contractors. In 1988, the Department of Energy's GOCO facilities came
under a DoE-wide mandate for information preservation. Because of their
unique status, GOCO records from all federal agencies are subject to
government-style record management practices, including retention
schedules.
The Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDC) also
follow government records management practices. Even though they are
not strictly federal records, FFRDC records fall into a category that
the National Archives may consider taking as a donation.50
Many major defense contractors maintain extensive archives that
are accessible to the public only by permission. A company may destroy
records and models when it considers them to have no further value, or
when a contract requires destruction of classified information. A
contractor may be permitted to retain national security information, but
then must shoulder the cost of protection, a burden that mitigates
against the retention of classified material.
Access to corporate records is limited according to a company's
proprietary rights under the Trade Secrets Act, non-disclosure
agreements among companies and between individuals, national security
considerations, space and logistics, and the nature of the research. In
some organizations, both the public relations and legal departments must
approve disclosure in response to outside requests for information. A
willingness to increase public access adds significantly to the cost of
historic resource retention.51 In addition, releasing
information may have security implications for foreign nationals, even
if not for domestic interests.
Other Significant Repositories of National Security Records
The Department of Defense Acquisition Historical Center
At the behest of the Under Secretary of Defense (Acquisition), DoD is
developing plans for the Department of Defense Acquisition Historical
Center. The center is to become a central repository for information on
DoD acquisitions, with an emphasis on weapon systems. It will not
collect original documents, so as not to interfere with Federal records
management, but will focus instead on copies of records, electronic
forms, and other information sources.52
North Atlantic Treaty Organization
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), with its 12
original signatory countries - Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Great
Britain, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal,
and the United States - was created to form a defensive alliance against
Soviet aggression. In fourteen articles, the North Atlantic Treaty
outlined its goals and implementation, its organization, and the
procedures for withdrawal. The treaty went into effect on August 24,
1949. Greece and Turkey joined in 1952, the Federal Republic of Germany
in 1955, and Spain in 1982. The forces that form the NATO defense are
drawn from member nations, stationed on military bases in various
countries within the defined boundaries and include air, ground, and
naval support.53
Records in two registries at NATO headquarters in Brussels,
Belgium, document all the major political, economic, military and
strategic matters undertaken or studied within the organization. They
also cover related matters of military support, defense production, and
military procurement; the building of defense infrastructure; civil
defense planning; and ntemal security cooperation.54 Unfortunately, relatively
little is known about the deliberations of this important Cold War body
and its posture in military and diplomatic crises because these records
are almost inaccessible under existing NATO procedures. A recently
completed study commissioned by NATO surveyed records from the
organization's inception through 1958. The Deputy Permanent
Representatives who are expected to meet to consider declassification
and release of the 1949-1958 documents, as discussed in the report, must
decide what is to be released and when, where the records will be held,
and how or if they will be made public commercially.55
Preserving Literary Properties
Paper and microform copies of documents are naturally volatile.
In recent years, a number of professional groups, including the National
Archives and the Society of American Archivists, have led efforts to
limit losses of these materials. The result is a wide range of
preservation options. In addition, today's records managers and
archivists face new challenges, some of them posed in the courts, in
storing and preserving electronically generated records, including
computerized files and data bases, electronic mail, and other relatively
ephemeral media.56
The storage of paper records, including photographs, maps, and
architectural drawings, requires controlled environments to protect the
materials from extreme fluctuations in temperature and humidity,
exposure to ultraviolet light, and natural hazards including fire,
flooding, atmospheric pollution, and vermin. Some DoD repositories
contain undifferentiated collections of artifacts, records, and art.
They are at special risk when housed in surplus, substandard space and
organized by non-professionals.57
Currently, the National Archives is addressing the competing
demands of document preservation and conservation of paper. Permanent
records demand a high-quality, alkaline buffered paper stock in order to
survive.58 This
high-quality paper may contain a small percentage of recycled material,
but for the most part requires new stock. At the same time, a draft
Executive Order has been circulated that describes efforts to reduce the
waste generated by the federal government as the nation's largest single
user of paper. Central to this effort is the use of post-consumer
paper, that is, paper that has been written or printed on, which under
current methods contains an acid level that makes it unsuitable for
permanent records. At this writing, the National Archives, the paper
manufacturing industry, and other interested parties are discussing
alternatives.59
![]() |
Electronic records stored on floppy disks and magnetic tape are
particularly vulnerable to destruction by dust, humidity, temperature
fluctuations, and static electricity. Data lasts only 5 to 10 years on
floppy disks. The shelf life of magnetic tapes varies considerably,
depending on the ingredients of the medium used, and generally should
last about 20 years. Neither were designed nor intended to be kept in
permanent archival storage.
The Center of Electronic Records of the National Archives accepts
electronic data if it Map denoting Cold War DEW line sites in Alaska, is
an example of a non-textual literary property is stored in formats that
fit the center's standards.60 Because technology changes so
rapidly, archived electronic records must be accompanied by technical
information about the original software and hardware used to generate
the data, as well as points of contact in the originating institution.
This documentation should also list how the data was gathered and
managed and the purpose for which it was created.61
Although the National Archives accepts electronic records,
professional archivists still recommend "hard" paper copies of any
electronically produced materials worthy of preservation. Therefore,
those within DoD who generate information must consider questions
relating to the long-term preservation of their documents, selecting the
appropriate media their memoranda, reports, and communications.62
In order to contain Soviet aggression and to defend its allies, the
United States stationed thousands of military men and women overseas
during the Cold War. They were supported by an army of civilians.
Although the size of the American presence waxed and waned with changing
geopolitical events, the numbers of personnel remained high until the
Cold War ended and the United States began the steady process of
reduction, realignment, and withdrawal. Left behind in the process of
base closure are facilities those built by, lent to, or rented to
Americans, since almost none were owned by the U.S. government.
Part of the history of an abandoned overseas installation or
redeployed unit can be retrieved from the voluminous documents that deal
with such matters as real property and military operations, which
existing federal law and regulations require DoD to maintain. It may
also be captured through artifacts that might exemplify Cold War
technology or an organization's lineage and traditions. Services'
regulations instruct base commanders to notify their service museum
authority about items of historical interest in their possession,
especially when disposal is under consideration. Before bases close,
the services frequently send teams to survey and evaluate artifacts.
![]() |
Unlike documents and artifacts, the sites, structures, and landscapes
that contribute physical evidence to the record of DoD's activities
abroad during the Cold War - such as listening posts and communications
stations, quonset huts that housed a range of military functions,
training areas, aircraft hangars, dry docks, nuclear submarine ports,
underground command centers, and logistical facilities, as well as those
churches, homes, and day care centers that provided social support to
families - do not remain in American hands.63
Laws and Regulations
It is not the purpose of this Report to describe the highly
complex and variable legal arrangements that govern U.S. forces
overseas. As a general matter, in the case of physical properties and
sites that it occupies abroad, the American military is subject to
Status of Forces Agreements, treaties, and the Overseas Environmental
Baseline Guidance Document and Final Governing Standards.
A Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) is a document that establishes
the legal rights and protocols of U.S. military forces stationed
overseas. There is not one standard agreement for all countries where
U.S. forces are stationed. Rather, agreements are negotiated between
the United States and individual host countries.
To clarify American responsibilities for units stationed abroad, the
Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Environment)
launched a task force to develop DoD-wide guidelines for properties of
host nations.64 As a
result, on October 1, 1992, DoD issued the Overseas Environmental
Baseline Guidance Document (OEBGD), which is designed to ensure
compliance with U.S. and host nation standards for active overseas
installations. The OEBGD applies to all DoD installations overseas when
"the host countries' environmental standards do not exist, are not
applicable, or provide less protection to human health and the natural
environment than the baseline guidance."65 Although it contains a
protocol for natural and cultural resources, the OEBGD does not provide
specific instruction for protection and management of Cold War resources
abroad.
Management and Preservation Issues and Approaches
Some artifacts from the Cold War that are important to foreign
and U.S. governments alike have already been preserved. For example,
the last guardhouse constructed for Checkpoint Charlie is housed today
in a private German museum, although it will soon be transferred
elsewhere. Two cars from the Berlin Duty Train are in the Fort Eustis
Transportation Museum. The "Command Car" is displayed in Berlin.66
Anglo-American ties have long been strong. Therefore the
possibilities for preservation of American Cold War sites in the United
Kingdom may be promising.67 Representatives of the
Cold War Task Area discussed a program of Joint sponsorship with the
British and U.S. branches of the International Council on Monuments and
Sites (ICOMOS) to document sites in England that are significant to both
countries. They might be found to be eligible for the Historic
Buildings and Monuments Commission (English Heritage), the British
version of the U.S. National Register of Historic Places. Even if sites
are not maintained in this manner, their documentation would preserve an
important piece of Cold War history.
Preservation of U.S. holdings may be more difficult in Asian
countries than in Europe. In Japan and Okinawa, for example, the
scarcity of land and the pressure for its reuse makes retaining U.S.
structures or landscapes in situ after the United States has
left, unlikely.68
Here, as elsewhere, the memory of regional and ethnic animosities and
historic events may override American preservation efforts. In Korea,
for instance, DoD occupies land previously held by the pre-World War II
Japanese military occupation.69 The ancient hostility
between Japan and Korea complicates any potential effort to preserve
these sites.70
In most cases, the United States cannot control the disposition
of overseas physical properties that housed its activities during the
Cold War. Typically, artifacts and documents are transferred with a
unit or wing to its new location, or are retired to a museum or archival
facility. However, the sites, structures, and landscapes cannot be
moved. Usually, therefore, the only option is to survey and document
overseas installations, recording the history of both DoD and the host
country in the process.
In one such effort, a team from the Naval Historical Center deployed
to the U.S. Naval Activity near the Holy Loch, Scotland, slated to close
as a nuclear submarine port. The team collected paper records, computer
disks, photographs, oral histories, artifacts, and other textual and
non-textual materials and produced a videotape of the interviews.
![]() |
Through this type of documentation, DoD makes a record of its
activities in parts of the world it has vacated. What the military
leaves in its wake will be the places; what it takes will be the
stories, photographs, drawings, documents, and objects that tell
historians, and therefore the American people, something about their
past during a perilous epoch during the 20th century.
Those of us reading this Report in 1994 recall the years of
anxiety, out in the cold. Some who were children in the 1950s remember
crouching down along school hallways or under desks during practice air
raid drills, with hands over our heads to "protect" ourselves. The
dreadful knowledge that we and our enemy faced each other across
stockpiles of weaponry capable of destroying the planet, with only the
threat of retaliation to deter their use, left psychological scars upon
more than two generations of Americans - and presumably also on those on
the "other side." The lives of many adults now in their prime have
spanned the years of the Cold War and its hot spots, from World War II
(the "good war") to the inconclusive Korean War, and through the
divisive Vietnam War, with its lengthy emotional aftermath that
unsettled the American military's certainty regarding its mission and
the willingness of society to support it. The jubilation that greeted
the dissolution of Soviet Communism signaled the close of an era and the
sense, at least temporarily, that with the end of the nuclear standoff
that marked the Cold War, the world might become more peaceful.
We are not the only generation to have lived in troubled but
interesting times, or whose story will be sifted and retold well past
our own lifetimes. At the outset, this Report stated that the Cold War
Task Area is not writing a history of the Cold War. That will be the
province of historians, journalists, sociologists, policy makers, and
Ph.D. candidates who will chum out Cold War books and monographs far
into the 21st century. The assignment for the Legacy Cold War Project
is to aid in the preservation of the raw materials from which those
volumes will be produced.
Congressional language directs the Legacy Program to establish a
project to "inventory, protect, and conserve the physical and literary
property and relics of the Department of Defense, in the United States
and overseas, connected with the origins and the development of the Cold
War." Legacy's congressional charge is seconded by the Secretary of
Defense and senior officials in the military departments concerned with
broadly defined issues of environmental security, as well as by DoD
cultural resource managers, historians, and curators who are faced daily
with the necessity to preserve, manage, and dispose of Cold War assets
at a time of massive military drawdown.
At this time of rapid change, objects are disappearing or being
discarded, buildings are being tom down, and records are being lost or
thrown away. The people responsible for DoD's material culture are
confronted with a daunting task in deciding how to protect and preserve
the evidence of the military's role during the Cold War - the structures
built to store and maintain the equipment, train the forces, and house
their dependents, the ships, aircraft, tanks, and their prototypes,
radar and electronics, launch complexes, logistical facilities, bombs,
missiles, machine guns, training simulators and combat training ranges,
research and manufacturing facilities, test sites and proving grounds,
spy satellites and listening posts, special operations bases, and
command/ control/communications sites. Commanders and resource managers
must sort out legal requirements and make professional judgments, with
little time or information by which to evaluate the historical
significance of these and other Cold War resources, or clear instruction
that allows them to make management decisions.
![]() |
Responsible caretakers throughout DoD are already beginning to
survey and evaluate portions of their Cold War heritage. The Cold War
Task Area is acting to provide direction and coordination of these
efforts in order to avoid duplication and unnecessary expense. It hopes
that these joint endeavors, engaging cultural resource professionals
from all the services, will allow the Department to examine and account
for its Cold War holdings in a coherent way, and may also lead to the
development of new or modified management tools where they are
needed.
The purpose of this Report is to provide a general description of
Cold War cultural resources, possible management and preservation
options for treating them, and an overview of the activities taking
place within and outside DoD to inventory and protect Cold War assets.
It recommends an approach to the preservation of Cold War material
culture, reiterated below, and has developed an action plan for the Cold
War Task Area designed to aid in the implementation of that approach.
Finally, the Task Area offers the following suggestions, intended to
enhance cooperation among the military services, as well as between DoD
and other federal agencies, with the goal of producing a consistent,
interdependent, and productive DoD-wide preservation effort.
Suggested Actions for Preservation and Documentation of Cold War
Resources
§ Preservation. The Cold War Task Area maintains that it is
inappropriate and unnecessary for all Cold War cultural resources - the
military hardware or other property developed or constructed during the
period - to be evaluated according to the requirements for National
Register eligibility. It does recommend, however, that DoD make every
effort to identify important types of resources from the Cold War. They
can then be considered for preservation, based upon the range of options
discussed in Chapter II of this Report. As a result, the function and
design of the major resource types from the Cold War will be documented
for the historical record, and an informed evaluation will underlie any
preservation decision.
§ Data bases. To aid in drafting management tools and disseminating
information regarding Cold War resources, the information gathered from
inventories and research studies should be compiled and stored
electronically and made generally available.
§ Declassification. The Legacy Cold War Task Area commends the
declassification efforts currently underway within some offices of DoD,
but urges others who have been less active to initiate or step up their
efforts. It recommends that the military departments and national
security agencies faced with increasingly strict requirements to
declassify records join in a multi-agency effort to coordinate their
procedures, possibly under the auspices of the Office of the Secretary
of Defense.
§ Contractor records. Regarding records still held by defense
industry contractors, further efforts should be made to promote
corporate commitments to archival programs based on professional
archival standards; to capture the records of defense-related industries
as they reorganize, disband, etc.; and to support tax incentives for
defense industries currently undergoing reductions who save or donate
defense records.
§ Document collection and storage. For a variety of reasons, many
records that explicate the military's roles and missions during the Cold
War are not retired to Federal records centers. The services keep many
records in many different places. Real property records, for example,
tend not to be retired routinely along with the operational or
historical records that explain the use of facilities. Contractor
records, personal papers, and Cold War collections such as the old
Current News are not covered by the FRA. In other cases, records
are simply lost or thrown away. An archive storage facility for these
disparate types of Cold War materials would contribute to their
retention and usability.
§ Collections management inventory and data base. An electronic
database should be created to include description, location. and
accountability data of Cold War-related artifacts found in DoD
collections.
§ Overseas studies and surveys. Because DoD exercises far less
control over the preservation of overseas sites than those in the United
States, it cannot require that foreign-source documents relating to
facilities used by the United States be retired to the National
Archives. DoD funding to pursue studies and surveys of installations
and artifacts related to the U.S. military presence overseas during the
Cold War should be given high priority.
§ Partnerships for East-West projects. Partnerships should be
pursued between DoD and other federal and outside agencies active in
Cold War studies to consider strategies for protecting NATO and Eastern
bloc records. Similarly, the instigation of partnerships among the
Departments of State and Defense and international bodies may permit
consideration of the preservation of overseas Cold War facilities in
which the United States has an interest.
§ Cold War Project administration. The Cold War Task Area
recommends that the Cold War Project, which Congress required the Legacy
Program to establish by 1993, continue to encourage and coordinate
broad-based scholarly, environmental, and cultural resource management
activities related to the legacy of DoD during the Cold War. Depending
upon the fiscal and staffing resources allocated to it, the Task Area
could provide an umbrella for actions taken to further the
recommendations above. It would:
The Cold War Task Area makes its suggestions in the spirit of helping
to clarify the issues that DoD faces as it deepens its commitment and
broadens its program of good stewardship of Cold War historic
resources.
Sponsored Conferences
Cold War Working Group Meeting, Fort Myer, VA, October
28, 1991
Cold War Context Meeting, Washington, DC, June 25, 1992
Department of Defense-National Archives and Records Administration
Declassification Conference, Washington, DC, October 20-21, 1992
Preserving the History of the Military Contracting Industry: A
Conference Co-Sponsored by the Legacy Resource Management Program,
Department of Defense; National Archives and Records Administration; and
the National Air and Space Museum, Smithsonian Institution, Santa
Monica, CA, November 19-20, 1992
Presentations
Society of American Archivists, Philadelphia, PA,
September 1991
National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers (NCSHPO),
San Francisco, CA, October 15, 1991
National Council on Public History, Columbia, SC, March 11-15, 1992
NCSHPO Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, March 21-23, 1992
Organization of American Historians, Chicago, IL, April 2-5, 1992
Society of American Archaeologists, Pittsburgh, PA, April 7, 1992
DoD Legacy Pacific Regional Workshop, Honolulu, HI, April 14-16,
1992
Society for History in the Federal Government, Washington, DC, April 14,
1992
Department of Defense Cultural Resource Conference, F.E. Warren Air
Force Base, WY, May 4-5, 1992
National Guard Historians Meeting, Helena, MT, May 11-12, 1992
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Environment) Thomas Baca, June
19, 1992
NCSHPO Board Meeting, Juneau, AK, July 17-21, 1992
TAMS Meeting, Washington, DC, July 21-23, 1992
TAMS Meeting, Fort Belvoir, VA, September 18, 1992
US/ICOMOS meeting, Miami, FL, October 9, 1992
Joint American Historical Association-Organization of American
Historians-Society of
American Archivists, Committee on Archives, Washington, DC, October 19,
1992
Army Cultural Resource Planning Meeting, Ft. Benjamin Harrison, ID,
November 5, 1992
TAMS Meeting, San Antonio, TX, December 1, 1992
US/ICOMOS Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, January 16, 1993
NCSHPO Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, March 31, 1993
Organization of American Historians, Anaheim CA, April 17, 1993
National Council on Public History, Valley Forge, PA, April 29-May 1,
1993
Sponsored Meetings
National Coordinating Committee for the Promotion of
History, April 16, 1992
Montana State Historic Preservation Office, Marcella Sherfy, SHPO,
Helena, MT, May 12, 1992
Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense (Environment) Staff, May 28,
1992
DoD History Offices, June 1992:
Office of the Secretary of Defense History Office
Joint Chiefs of Staff History Office
Center of Military History
Center for Air Force History
Naval Historical Center
National Archives and Records Administration, July 9, 1992
National Air and Space Museum, Smithsonian Institution, July 13,
1992
New York State Historic Preservation Office, Julia Stokes, deputy SHPO,
July 19, 1992
Alaska State Historic Preservation Office, Judith Bittner, SHPO, July
22, 1992
National Park Service, Alaska Regional Office, Anchorage, AK, July, 22,
1992
University of South Carolina historian Dan Bilderback, August 17,
1992
National Archives and Records Administration and National Air and Space
Museum, Smithsonian, September 16, 1992
Arizona State Historic Preservation Office, Jim Garrison, SHPO, January,
1993
Ohio State Historic Preservation Office, Ray Luce, SHPO, April 5,
1993
Texas State Historic Preservation Office, Amy Dase, April 17, 1993
Conferences Attended
National Trust for Historic Preservation Annual
Meeting, San Francisco, CA, October 16-20, 1991
Beyond the Cold War, An Academic Conference, Madison, WI, October 20-21,
1991
American Association of Museums Annual Conference, Baltimore, MD, April
27-29, 1992
Society of American Archivists Annual Meeting, Montreal, Quebec,
September 12-16, 1992
The Atomic West Symposium, Seattle WA, September 25-28, 1992
National Trust for Historic Preservation Annual Meeting, Miami, FL,
October 6-10, 1992,
Navy Cultural Resource Conference, Norfolk, VA, November 9, 1992
Site Visits
Alaska, July 21-August 2, 1992
Carlisle Barracks and Museum, PA, October 5-6, 1992
Japan and Korea, September 24-October 2, 1992
Key West, FL, October 12, 1992
Belgium, England, Germany, and Scotland, October 23-November 13,
1992
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH, April 5-8, 1993
Archives Visited
Air Force Photographic Archives, National Air and Space
Museum
Army Combat Art Archives
Army Corps of Engineer Photographic Archives
Navy Combat Art Archives
Navy Photographic Archives
Cold War Demonstration Projects, FY 1991-1993
Demonstration projects serve as tools to survey,
inventory, and explore a variety of Cold War resources owned by DoD and
others. Many of the projects will be used as case studies to provide
guidance for further research. Others, when completed, will provide the
public and historians with previously unseen documents and
histories that can be used to better understand the Cold War. The
Legacy program partially or completely funded 26 Cold War-related
demonstration projects between FY 1991-1993. A number of the projects
involve significant partnerships between DoD and other agencies and
organizations. Unless otherwise noted, all projects were funded late in
FY 93 and, therefore, are just beginning.
Cold War Activities by DoD, Federal Agencies,
and
State Historic Preservation Officers 1991 - 1993
Office of the Secretary of Defense
A history of the Pentagon building by Dr. Alfred Goldberg, The
Pentagon: The First Fifty Years, has recently been published by
GPO. A conference of former East Bloc military archivists is in the
planning phase as a partnership among DoD, CIA, and Department of State
History Offices and the National Archives and Records Administration.
It will be funded as a Cold War demonstration project for the Legacy
program. The conference would explore research possibilities and build
joint projects.
Army Corps of Engineers, Alaska District
A Cold War resource management plan is being developed for Alaska in
consultation with the State historic preservation officer and the 11th
Air Force. The report, expected by December 1993, will have four
components: an inventory of all sites in Alaska (approximately 200),
brief descriptions of each, discussion of historic context, and
recommendations for each site. The Corps may continue with historic
reports on special historical topics, either on types such as the DEW
line or missile systems, or on activities such as fighter-intercept.
Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile District
The Key West Naval Air Station is the subject of a Section 106
compliance survey. The Corps is looking at buildings built prior to
1946 to determine the eligibility for the National Register, but is also
paying special attention to the Cold War significance of the structures
and station itself, mainly stemming from the Cuban Missile Crisis. The
report will include a short history of the Key West Naval Air Station,
building inventory forms, and photographs.
Army Corps of Engineers, New England Division
The Corps of Engineers has completed a comprehensive survey of Nike
missile sites in the Northeast (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, Rhode
Island, and Vermont) as part of a programmatic agreement for portions of
the Defense Environmental Restoration Program (DERP). Most Nike sites
have been decommissioned for more than a decade. Because sites are
deteriorating or are owned by private individuals and groups, the
current Corps survey will be the last DoD opportunity to document some
facilities.
Central Intelligence Agency
In accordance with the new openness policy launched by former
Director William Gates, the CIA has been working on a series of symposia
and declassification projects. An international conference on the Cuban
Missile Crisis was held last year accompanied by a volume of newly
declassified documents relating to the crisis. A conference on CIA
estimates of Soviet power since the 1970's is planned for October 1994.
Declassification technicians have been directed by Congress to review
documents relating to the assassination of John F. Kennedy, but other
topics have been targeted for future efforts. In 1992 the CIA
declassified 100,000 pages of information. It plans to publish its
previous intelligence estimates as well as its internal journal as soon
as possible. Declassification projects will include documents relating
to the coups d'etats in Iran and Guatemala as well as a joint project
with the Truman Library to declassify documents dating from the origins
of the modern intelligence community.
Department of Energy
Work is underway to publish the final volume of the history of the
Atomic Energy Commission. Two important DoE Cold War sites have been
placed on the National Register: the B Reactor at the Hanford Nuclear
Site in Washington and two residential areas adjoining Oak Ridge
National Energy Laboratories in Tennessee.
Department of State
The Department of State must declassify Cold War documents in
compliance with a Federal statute passed in October 1991. First, the
Department of State is required to bring publication of the Foreign
Relations series up to date by 1996 (to include declassified
material of 30 years and older). Second, the Department of State must
coordinate this effort with all relevant Federal agencies to ensure
completeness. Third, the Department of State must open all its records
over 30 years old unless special criteria mandate continued
classification. The Historian's Office does not project successful
fulfillment of the latter portion by the October 1993 deadline. A
proposal for a joint U.S.-Russian project to document the Cold War
awaits pending communication from Russian officials.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
As part of the continuing "NASA History Series," the Historian's
Office is working on a study of NASA-industry relations. The
Historian's Office has submitted a proposal to Legacy to study the
DoD-NASA relationship.
National Security Agency
Records management at National Security Agency (NSA) calls for
systematic declassification review of documents drafted after 1945.
Newer documents are only reviewed in response to a Congressional mandate
or FOIA request. NSA’s Center for Cryptologic History writes classified
histories of NSA’s operations. The center also coordinates symposia and
maintains a museum.
Nuclear History Program, University of Maryland
The Nuclear History Program, currently located at the University of
Maryland, is an international program of research, training, and
discussion concerning the development and deployment of nuclear forces,
the elaboration of policies for their management and possible use, and
their role in the evolution of relations among European nations, the
United States, and the Soviet Union. The program has sponsored several
research projects, conferences, and oral histories focusing on important
topics of Cold War history. Through its offices in Germany and the
United States, the program publishes a bulletin and a series of
occasional papers. Topics for future conferences include the Berlin
Crisis, Germany and Nuclear Weapons in the Cold War, the Russian and
U.S. Nuclear Establishments, and U.S. Weapon Labs. Copies of all
publications and supporting documentation will be available from the
affiliated National Security Archive.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Two volumes have been written on the history of the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) up to 1974. A Short History of Nuclear
Regulation, 1946-1990, published in January 1993, brought the
history up to 1990 in concise format.
Smithsonian Institution, American History Museum
The museum is preparing an exhibit, "The Long Twilight Struggle,"
partially funded by the Legacy program. The joint Russian-American
project will comprise three exhibits: 'The Arms Race," "The Space Race",
and "Popular Images of the Cold War." Funding is pending for an
accompanying conference series in cooperation with the Nuclear History
Program. One conference will take place in March 1994 to explore
whether the Cold War is a viable period for historical study.
Smithsonian Institution, Armed Forces History Branch
The Armed Forces History Branch is working on several projects
related to the Cold War. It is collaborating with the University of
Maryland and the Air and Space Museum on "The Long Twilight Struggle."
It is also planning an exhibit titled "Science in America from 1876 to
the Present," which will include many Cold War artifacts that is
expected to open in 1994. It is planning a conference, co-sponsored
with American University, in Washington, DC to consider the 45 year span
of the Cold War, emphasizing 1950-1960.
Smithsonian Institution, Woodrow Wilson International Center for
Scholars
The Smithsonian Institution's Cold War History Project was
established in 1991 with the goal of disseminating new information and
perspectives on the history of the Cold War. The project publishes a
quarterly bulletin, awards fellowships to young scholars of the
Cold War, and organizes international conferences. A recent
conference in Moscow, New Evidence in Cold War History, brought together
historians and archivists from the East and West to discuss new insights
into major Cold War events, crises, and policies. A collection
of papers and documents from the conference will be published. Upcoming
conference topics will include the Cold War in Asia and the Cold War in
East Central Europe. In addition, a conference co-sponsored with the
Nuclear History Program will focus on the Cold War in Germany.
A survey of historic preservation initiatives for military
sites in the various states reveals that while some steps have been
taken, a comprehensive state-by-state inventory of Cold War-related
sites is far from complete. The Army Corps of Engineers, in partnership
with the State historic preservation offices (SHPOs), is most active in
the process of conducting the surveys and related work. Recent budget
difficulties in some states have hindered the ability of SHPOs to engage
in these types of surveys.
Alabama
The Army Corps of Engineers has conducted studies at Redstone
Arsenal and Fort McClellan. Redstone Arsenal's Cold War relevance is
limited to Missile Command administration and small-scale testing.
Within Redstone is Marshall Space Flight Center, a NASA enclave that
contains some Cold War relics under NASA jurisdiction. Fort McClellan's
properties predate the Cold War era except for a chemical weapons
testing facility currently in operation.
A USAF radar site on Dauphin Island was determined to be ineligible
for the National Register by the SHPO because significant alterations by
subsequent owners resulted in its loss of historic integrity. The site
is being integrated into a Sealab consortium project to construct
wetlands and a nature center.
Alaska
The Army Corps of Engineers is launching a long-term project to
document Cold War sites in Alaska. First it will produce a
comprehensive plan. Each succeeding year it will produce a report on
some component of the Cold War, including weapon systems, fighter
intercept, or communication systems. HAER has completed a recordation
of the DEW line site at Bullen Point. The SHPO and the Army Corps of
Engineers are in consultation with the USAF regarding the planned
closure of 26 Air Force sites of Cold War significance. In addition,
planned alterations to communications equipment at White Alice and NIKE
Missile sites will require further consultation. Adak Naval Station,
already a National Historic Landmark because of its World War II
significance, has been downscaled and designated a Superfund
environmental cleanup site.
Arizona
The Titan II Missile Site 571-7 in Pima County has been placed on
the National Register.
Arkansas
An archaeological study undertaken in compliance with Section 106 of
NHPA, was conducted at Eaker Air Force Base.
Colorado
Titan I Missile test pads have been declared a Superfund
environmental cleanup site. Martin-Marietta, the contractor that owns
the site, plans to preserve the uncontaminated structures and provide
interpretation for them as part of their main facility tour. Rocky
Mountain Arsenal, another Superfund site, may be turned into a nature
preserve. The Pueblo Army Depot was the subject of a level 4
documentation of 27 prototypical structures by a contractor. The site
includes ammunition storage igloos. While the original survey did not
find them significant by National Register criteria, a second survey is
planned.
Connecticut
The Corps of Engineers is currently surveying Nike missile sites in
the State.
Delaware
The NPS is currently performing an archaeological survey at Dover
Air Force Base.
Florida
The Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile, Alabama, District is
documenting the Key West Naval Air Station, including a survey of Cuban
Missile Crisis sites and buildings.
Idaho
The experimental breeder reactor EBR-1 at the Idaho National Energy
Lab was determined to be a National Historic Landmark.
Illinois
The Corps of Engineers is performing a HABS/HAER survey of two NIKE
missile sites in the State in response to a request from the SHPO.
Indiana
Fort Benjamin Harrison is scheduled for closure. The DoD has
submitted an application for National Historic Landmark status based
upon its pre-Cold War significance.
Iowa
The SHPO has no plans for Cold War resources.
Louisiana
It is the SHPO policy to only consider sites more than 50 years
old.
Maine
A survey of Nike missile sites was recently completed. A survey is
being performed at Loring Air Force Base, which is scheduled to close.
The SHPO has approached the Army Corps of Engineers about surveying the
Snark Missile site in Presque Isle. As the country's first
intercontinental missile, the Snark has great Cold War significance.
Michigan
The SHPO has developed a memorandum of agreement with the Army Corps
of Engineers to document Nike missile sites in the state. The Pot
Austin radar installation has been surveyed.
Minnesota
The SHPO was involved with a Section 106 compliance survey of the
Twin Cities Arsenal, which produced small arms. It was decided that the
arsenal was not significant.
Mississippi
The SHPO reports that the military installations in the State are
looking only at World War II-era resources.
Missouri
The state is attempting to gain legal control of a decommissioned
Minuteman II ICBM silo associated with Whiteman Air Force Base. Air
Force ownership and provisions of the START Treaty complicate that
effort. The state would like to develop the site for interpretation and
approach officials in the former Soviet Union about the possibility of
establishing sister silo museums.
Nebraska
The Strategic Air Command (SAC) Museum in Omaha is an example of a
private, Cold War-related preservation initiative. The SHPO established
the museum in 1972 with the cooperation of the Air Force. Recently, a
nonprofit organization assumed responsibility. This museum is the only
one that is exclusively dedicated to the history of SAC. The museum
contains many SAC artifacts, including some from the old-model SAC
Headquarters command post at Offut Air Force Base.
The SHPO plans to include Cold War sites in an upcoming survey of
Cheyenne County. The SHPO has previously been involved in a survey of
Minuteman III sites in Cheyenne County motivated by computer upgrades.
The Army Corps of Engineers has surveyed an above-ground Atlas missile
site at an eastern Nebraska National Guard Base, which is reported to be
the first semi-hardened intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) in the
country. Offut Air Force Base expects to receive funding for a NPS
inventory of the entire base, including Cold War sites.
Nevada
The DoE recently submitted a National Register nomination for the
Sedan Crater nuclear test site, which was the site of an Operation
Plowshare detonation. DoE has expressed willingness to embark upon a
comprehensive survey of all nuclear test sites. In addition, the Nevada
State Preservation Plan was used as a model for a current Legacy-funded
project. The project developed a national historic context for historic
cantonments on DoD installations from 1790 to 1940. With an enormous
time period to survey for building types, the Legacy study used
the Nevada approach for its overview, themes, site-specific information,
and property types.
New Hampshire
The SHPO has no plans for Cold War resources.
New Jersey
The SHPO performed an evaluation of a Boeing Michigan Aeronautical
Research Center (BOMARC) missile site at McGuire Air Force Base per
Section 106 requirements. In 1960 a fire in a shelter caused a partial
melting of the missile, and resulted in low-level radioactive
contamination of the shelter. The SHPO concluded that the project to
remove extant portions of shelter 204 and other associated structures
and the removal of contaminated soils would not adversely affect the
site. The Victorian house that served as the site of the 1967 Glassboro
Summit between the superpowers is already on the National Register based
on other criteria.
New York
The SHPO is awaiting funding allocation for a State-wide inventory
of Cold War missile and communication sites.
North Carolina
A survey of seven observation towers and a rocket assembly building
on Topsail Island is currently underway. This facility was a part of
"Operation Bumblebee," which led to the development of the ramjet
engine. A systematic survey of Onslow County included Cold War
resources at the Camp Lejeune Marine Base.
North Dakota
The NPS took initial steps toward a Section 106 review of the
Stanley R. Nicholson Safeguard Site, an anti-ballistic missile (ABM)
complex associated with Grand Forks Air Force Base near Nekoma.
However, since some components of the site are being used by the Air
Force for research, a program of site interpretation may currently be
precluded. As a potentially operable ABM site, the site will come into
conflict with the 1972 ABM Treaty and its protocols if another missile
defense facility is constructed. A historical context study of the site
has been prepared as part of a potential demolition plan. The site is
especially significant as the only U.S. ABM system actually
constructed.
Ohio
The Rivenna armament manufacturing site is closing and the SHPO is
looking at its potential significance. A recent upgrade and new
construction at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base involved the SHPO in a
Section 106 compliance survey regarding structures constructed prior to
the Cold War. Many of the individual site histories included
information on their Cold War significance.
Oklahoma
The SHPO is occasionally involved in Section 106 compliance surveys
at military bases, but only for World War II-era significance. There
are no plans for Cold War resources.
Pennsylvania
The SHPO cites the 50-year rule as precluding consideration of Cold
War resources.
South Carolina
The Legacy program has funded a current study of Cold War sites
across the State, undertaken by the Public History Program of the
University of South Carolina.
The Marine Recruit Depot on Parris Island is the subject of an
architectural survey that will focus on structures less than 50-years
old, but will also make recommendations on newer structures.
Another private initiative to preserve Cold War material culture is
the preservation of the nuclear ship Savannah, which was the only
one of its type. Built in the late 1950's, the Savannah
sailed into the late 1960's and participated in the Atoms for Peace
Program. A private operator, subsidized by the government, originally
operated it as a museum. It has been moored at Patriot's Point Maritime
Museum, Mount Pleasant, South Carolina, since 1981. The museum was
established by the South Carolina Historical Society, but now a
non-profit development authority runs the day-to-day operations. The
U.S. Maritime Association holds title to the Savannah.
South Dakota
The SHPO is working with NPS to conduct a HABS/HAER recordation of a
Minuteman II ICBM site and perhaps nominate the site as a National
Historic Landmark. Because of its proximity to the Badlands National
Park, NPS is considering providing interpretation of the site to park
visitors. Ellsworth Air Force Base is conducting an inventory to
include Cold War resources. In accordance with the provisions of the
START Treaty, Minuteman II ICBM silos are being scaled back and the
SHPO has been involved in some Section 106 compliance surveys of
these sites.
Tennessee
The DoE has issued a request for proposals for a cultural resources
survey at Oak Ridge National Energy Laboratory. The survey report
should be followed by a programmatic agreement and perhaps a National
Register nomination from the DoE. The residential community surrounding
Oak Ridge has already attained National Register status. The SHPO has
been involved in several Section 106 compliance surveys of Hollston Army
Ammunition Plant. The plant was geared up for major Cold War crises and
subsequently "mothballed."
Utah
The NPS has issued a request for proposals for a survey of Hill Air
Force Base.
Virginia
The SHPO developed a memorandum of agreement to document a testing
device at the Harry Diamond Labs in Woodbridge, Virginia, before it was
moved to White Sands, New Mexico. The device was used to test the
effects of nuclear blasts on electronic equipment.
Washington
Inventories that include Cold War resources have been conducted at
the Keyport Undersea Warfare facility, Naval Station Puget Sound, and
Fairchild Air Force Base. The SHPO generally avoids addressing
resources less than 50 years old, but reports that most installations
where they are located are already recognized for earlier significance.
In fact, until recently modem military facilities were viewed as
obstructions to older adjacent sites.
Wisconsin
The State Social Action Archives houses the largest collection of
anti-Vietnam War material in the country.
Wyoming
The SHPO has been involved in Section 106 compliance surveys of
Minuteman III ICBM sites associated with F.E. Warren Air Force Base.
The SHPO determined a computer upgrade constituted an adverse effect
and, as a compromise, an exhibit on the Minuteman III and its computer
systems was recently added to the F.E. Warren Air Force Base Museum.
The following are facsimile reproductions of U.S. Air
Force and U.S. Navy policy statements issued to provide standards to
military and civilian officials determining the disposition of
departmental properties. Both these documents explain the grounding of
present defense historic properties policies in the National Historic
Preservation Act.
Introduction In 1989 the Berlin Wall fell and "Checkpoint
Charlie" became history. Suddenly the historic preservation community
became aware of a Cold War heritage that would be lost without timely
action. Both the DoD Legacy Resource Management Program and the Air
Force Federal Preservation Officer acted to ensure that historically
significant properties of the Cold War are identified, recorded, and, if
feasible, retained for study and public education. This guidance is
intended as an interim measure for use at Air Force installations,
mainly to assist them in complying with Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act. It is not aimed at meeting the broad mandate
for Cold War study set down in the DoD Legacy Program. A more
comprehensive treatment of Cold War history and historic preservation is
expected from the Legacy Program in the next year or two.
In the simple question and answer format used here, we have relied
heavily and purposefully on existing regulations and guidance of the
Department of Interior, again for compliance purposes. If criteria for
listing in the National Register of Historic Places or other such
guidance is changed, we will use it. Comments and criticisms on this
interim guidance are welcomed from all parties.
1.0 WHY SHOULD I BE CONCERNED ABOUT HISTORIC PROPERTIES FROM THE
COLD WAR? ISN'T THAT TOO RECENT?
1.1 Although 50 years is the normal age for the Interior
Department (the lead agency in such matters) to begin considering
properties potentially significant, its regulations and guidelines do
allow for younger properties to be nominated if they are of exceptional
importance, or are integral parts of National Register districts. Even
though the Cold War ended only recently, it was unquestionably of
exceptional importance in our Nation's history. Experience shows that
waiting 50 years before engaging in historic preservation activities
would result in the loss of many historic resources. The Deputy
Assistant Secretary of the Air Force for Environment, Safety &
Occupational Health, Mr. Gary Vest, recognized this in a 9 Oct 92 action
memo to the Air Force Civil Engineer (Atch 1). He stated that bases
must consult with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) on
actions that may affect significant Cold War or highly technical or
scientific facilities. In a 1 Jul 91 memorandum, the Air Force
forwarded policy guidance on the latter area (Atch 2).
2.0 WHAT DOD/AF PROGRAMS DEAL WITH COLD WAR HISTORIC PRESERVATION
ISSUES?
2.1 In November 1990 Congress tasked DoD in its Legacy Resource
Management Program (P.L. 10 1 -51 1, Sec 8120) to undertake studies of
the Cold War and to identify significant properties worthy of
preservation. 'Me Legacy Program, directed by the Deputy Under
Secretary of Defense for Environmental Security, DUSD(ES), funded
several projects in the Cold War area; these are summarized below.
3.0 WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH COLD WAR STUDIES IN DOD?
3.1 A draft report titled "Coming in from the Cold: a
Preliminary Report on the Legacy Cold War Study" was completed in
December 1991. Although still officially a draft, its recommendations
will be folded into the 1993 report to Congress on the Cold War required
by the Legacy statute.
3.2 To meet the Congressional mandate, a draft Report to
Congress, outlining Cold War-related historic resources, existing laws
that pertain to them, problems associated with their management and
preservation, and recommendations for future activities of the Cold War
Task Area, is expected in the fall of 1993.
3.3 Dr. Rebecca Cameron of the Air Force History Office is
the Legacy Resource Management Program task area manager for the DoD
Cold War history project (HQ USAF/CEVP, 1260 Air Force Pentagon,
Washington, DC 20330-1260, (703) 6978937)). Among its forthcoming
activities, the Cold War Task Area will sponsor a series of case studies
that relate Cold War themes to military activities and to the sites,
structures, buildings, objects, artifacts, and documents that illustrate
them; will develop criteria and processes for identifying, evaluating,
and protecting Cold War historic resources; will pursue projects
concerned with declassification of records and with curation of Cold
War-related artifacts; will coordinate the Legacy demonstration projects
with Cold War themes; and, drawing upon a uniform methodology, will
coordinate an effort to survey DoD Cold War holdings.
3.4 Some examples of the Legacy Resource Management Program
demonstration projects with Cold War themes include: (1) the Department
of History at the University of South Carolina is a partner with DoD
Legacy in assessing Cold War properties at all Defense installations in
that state; (2) the Army Corps of Engineers is developing some
documentary information on the Nike missile defense system as part of
its installation restoration program; and (3) late in FY92 a Legacy
proposal by the National Park Service regarding Minuteman II/NIKE
Missile Launch Facilities was funded. The project will inventory,
evaluate, and document to Historic American Engineering Record standards
MMII and NIKE facilities in the Midwestern United States and develop a
historic context based on both the administrative and technological
components.
3.5 In summary, for the Cold War we have the outlines of a
sociopolitical timeline developed and some initial efforts at context
development. For preservation purposes, we now need the help of
military historians and informants in identifying significant tangible
DoD assets from the Cold War.
3.6 Treatment of Cold War properties in terms of inventory
and evaluation for compliance purposes may eventually be worked out
programmatically by DoD with the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation and the National Conference of State Historic Preservation
Officers. Until that time, however, installations must consult
case-by-case with their SHPOs on any action that could affect a
historically significant Cold War property.
4.0 WHAT ARE OUR EXISTING SOURCES FOR TECHNICAL GUIDANCE ON THE
HISTORIC PRESERVATION OF COLD WAR PROPERTIES?
4.1 National Register Bulletin 15: "How to Apply the National
Register Criteria for Evaluation," National Park Service
4.2 National Register Bulletin 22: "Guidelines for
Evaluating and Nominating Properties that have Achieved Significance
within the Last Fifty Years," National Park Service
4.3 National Register Bulletin 29, "Guidelines for
Restricting Information about Historic and Prehistoric Resources,"
National Park Service
4.4 Balancing Historic Preservation Needs with the
Operation of Highly Technical or Scientific Facilities, 1991,
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
5.0 HOW DO WE DEFINE COLD WAR HISTORIC PROPERTIES?
5.1 In November 1992 Legacy Program representatives suggested
the following temporal boundaries for the Cold War: from the March 1946
"Iron Curtain speech of Winston Churchill to the fall of the Berlin Wall
in November 1989. Since these were easily recognizable to the
layperson, we have adopted them for this interim Section 106 guidance.
Cold War historic properties" are buildings, structures, sites,
objects, and districts built, used, or associated with critical
events or persons during this period and that possess exceptional
historic importance to the Nation or that are outstanding examples of
technological or scientific achievement. In addition to real property
assets, two other categories can be found to have historic significance:
artifacts and documents. The latter may or may not be associated with
surviving real property. Legacy Program definitions for these
categories follow.
Historic personal property is any artifact, relic of
battle experience or other military activity, piece of military
equipment, weapon, article of clothing, flag, work of art,~ movable
object, or other item of personal property to which historical or
cultural significance may be ascribed through professional evaluation of
historic associations to persons, events, places, eras, or military
organizations.
Historic records are any historical, oral-historical,
ethnographic, architectural, or other document that may provide a record
of the past, whether associated with real property or not, as determined
through professional evaluation of the information content and
significance of the information. Special care should be taken to ensure
that potentially important historic personal property and records are
not lost during base realignments, closures, and disposals. Identify
these items to records managers at the base and the gaining agency, who
should ensure that curation measures are taken that meet the standards
of the National Archives. Most Air Force Cold War historic properties
in the real property sense will be buildings and structures. Most of
this guidance is directed to their compliance treatment. The following
terminology is adapted directly from National Park Service guidelines
for the National Register of Historic Places. While they may be at odds
with some current military service conventions, their usage is
preferred, especially since the Keeper of the Register has the final say
in any determination of eligibility.
5.2 "Buildings" are created principally to shelter any form
of human activity. Parts of buildings are not eligible for
consideration independent of the rest of the existing building. The
whole building must be considered and its significant features
identified. Examples include: administration buildings, chapels,
dormitories, family housing, garages, hangars, launch control centers,
libraries, and radar stations.
5.3 "Structures" usually are made for purposes other than
creating human shelter and all of the extant structural elements must be
considered for eligibility. Examples include: aircraft, bridges,
fences, missiles and their silos, launch pads and weaponry, roads,
roads, runways, water towers, and wind tunnels. Aircraft would not
routinely be eligible as significant Cold War properties; however, if
associated with an exceptionally important event, person, theme,
scientific or technological development, they may warrant individual
recognition and treatment. That association would have to be clearly
documented through professional investigations by aviation
historians.
5.4 An "object refers to works that are primarily artistic in
nature or that are relatively small in scale and simply constructed.
Although it may be, by nature or design, movable, an object is
associated with a specific setting or environment (NPS Bulletin 15,
p.5).
|
Examples include: fountain, monument, statuary (note: movable sculptures and furniture are not eligible). See the Legacy terminology for historic personal property cited earlier. |
5.5 A "site" is the location of a significant event,
activity, etc. Actual physical remains may or may not be present at the
location. Although this usually refers to archeological sites and would
not typically be of concern for Cold War properties, such sites are
possible. Air Force examples include locations where critical missions
were stationed or events transpired, e.g., sites of early rocket testing
or test tracks (now dismantled), nuclear testing ranges, treaty signing
locations, and aircraft wrecks.
5.6 Finally, a "district" possesses a significant
concentration of buildings, structures, etc. united historically or
aesthetically by plan or physical development. An Air Force example
could include a block of buildings, lacking any significant
architectural or engineering merit, that hosted a crucial code breaking
or intelligence gathering activity during the Cold War, a group of
buildings built for nuclear weapon testing (laboratories), or an entire
installation constructed for a specific Cold War mission. Because the
majority of the Air Force-built inventory dates from the Cold War
period, the last category (entire installations) will be applied only
after extensive justification (cf. paras 11.1 and 12.4).
5.7 Historic properties can also be identified as sharing a
common theme or context. In this case they need not be co-located.
Some possible examples: Minuteman II Launch Control Centers and Launch
Facilities of South Dakota", "Nuclear Test Sites in the Desert
Southwest", etc.
6.0 HOW DO WE DETERMINE THE HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE OF COLD WAR
PROPERTIES?
6.1 As stated in the Introduction, we rely in this interim
guidance on Section 106 compliance on the Department of Interior's
National Register Criteria for Evaluation. These encourage nomination
of recently significant properties if they are of exceptional
importance to a community, State, region, or the Nation. According
to NPS, "The criteria do not describe exceptional, nor should they.
'Exceptional', by its own definition, cannot be fully catalogued or
anticipated."
6.2 Our approach will be thematic, i.e., "Cold War Historic
Properties of the Department of Defense, 1946-1989." All DoD Cold War
properties determined significant and eligible for the National Register
are so designated at the national level. Regional or local significance
remains to be determined through overviews, background studies, and
inventories to be conducted as these properties approach the 50 year
horizon.
6.3 Cold War historic properties may be of two classes:
6.3.1 Those that are eligible for listing on the
National Register of Historic Places.
6.3.2 Those that warrant designation as National Historic
Landmarks; these must have achieved extraordinary national
importance or significance.
7.0 WHAT ARE THE SPECIFIC CRITERIA OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE FOR
COLD WAR PROPERTIES?
7.1 Buildings, structures, objects, sites, or districts that
possess exceptional value or quality in illustrating the Cold War
heritage of the United States, that possess a high degree of integrity
of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and
association, and:
7.1.1 That are directly associated with events that have made
a significant contribution to, and are directly identified with, or that
outstandingly represent, the broad national pattern of United States
Cold War history and from which an understanding and appreciation of
those patterns may be gained; or
7.1.2 That are associated directly and importantly with the
lives of persons nationally significant in the Cold War
history of the United States; or
7.1.3 That represent some great idea or ideal of the American
people (e.g., Peace through Strength"); or
7.1.4 That embody the distinguishing characteristics of an
architectural, engineering, technological, or scientific type specimen
exceptionally valuable for a study of a period, style, method, or
technique of construction, or that represent a significant, distinctive
and exceptional entity whose components may lack individual
distinction.
7.2 Some of the military factors which influenced the shape of
plans and operations during the
Cold War era include:
|
Forward power projection Capability to engage at all scales: limited/theater/global Rapid deployment Rapid resupply Large standing force 24 hour vigilance Worldwide intelligence gathering Short warning/response time High level of security Emphasis on high technology (quality over quantity) |
8.0 HOW DO WE ESTABLISH THE CASE FOR EXCEPTIONAL SIGNIFICANCE?
8.1 According to the National Park Service, " ... nominations for
such properties must demonstrate that sufficient historical perspective
and scholarly, comparative analysis exist to justify the claim of
exceptional importance." Furthermore, the rationale or justification
must be an explicit part of the statement of significance and is not
treated as self-explanatory.
8.2 Unfortunately, we are several years away from having this
kind of reasoned basis from which to operate. In the meantime,
irreplaceable pieces of our Cold War legacy have been and will continue
to be lost. In this document the Air Force proposes an initial set of
property types and Air Force examples as meeting the criteria of
exceptional significance and eligibility for National Register listing.
Although the list will be an evolving one and we shall seek the
consensus of scholars and professional military alike, the litmus test
will be recognition by the public at large. This will ensure that we
focus our time and funds appropriately.
9.0 WHAT ARE AIR FORCE COLD WAR HISTORIC PROPERTY TYPES?
9.1 Air Force Cold War assets are grouped in the following
categories, subject to revision:
Operational and Support Installations
|
10.0 WHAT ARE AIR FORCE EXAMPLES OF THESE TYPES?
10.1 Air Force examples include:
10.1.1 Missile systems deployed in the CW era,
including IRBM and ICBM systems, e.g., Snark, Thor, Jupiter, Atlas,
Titan, and Minuteman. Specific examples include Space Launch Facility
576 A-3, Thor Launch Complex SLC- 10, and Titan Launch Facility 395-C,
all at Vandenberg AFB, CA; MMII LF A-9 and LCC A-1 at Malmstrom AFB;
MMII LCC Delta I and Delta IX LF, Ellsworth AFB.
10.1.2 Antiaircraft missile/Surface to Air (SAMJ systems;
Bomarc installations at McGuire, Otis, and Niagara. Nike and HAWK
systems operated by the Army in defense of Air Force installations may
be worthy of consideration.
10.1.3 Major airframe types deployed in the CW era,
e.g., F-86, F4, F-15, SR-71. The Air Force Museum maintains
representative examples of all types. Dispersed throughout most Air
Force installations, they number 1600+, including WWII specimens. For
airframes associated with exceptional people, events, or themes, and not
currently in the museum inventory, the proponent should develop
documentation to evaluate and support its significance.
10.1.5 SAC "moleholes" or alert facilities; examples at
Carswell, Castle, Mather, and Wurtsmith AFBs.
10.1.6 Training Facilities; Missile launch complexes at
Vandenberg AFB such as the Peacekeeper in Rail Garrison; simulated
Russian POW training camp at the Air Force Academy in Colorado
Springs.
10.1.7 Test and experimentation facilities; Johnston
Island, US Territory, Pacific Ocean (formerly USAF, now Navy/Defense
Nuclear Agency); site of high altitude nuclear testing and
anti-satellite (ASAT) system.
10.1.8 Air Force weapons production facilities
10.1.9 Key bases and command centers; Alternate
National Military Command Center (ANMCC), or Site R, Raven Rock, PA.
10.1.10 Special operations; Building P-1900, Air Force
Special Projects Facility, Westover AFB, MA.
11.0 WHAT AIR FORCE ASSETS ROM THE COLD WAR HAVE ALREADY BEEN
IDENTIFIED AS HISTORIC PROPERTIES?
11.1 Properties listed in the National Register of Historic
Places include:
11.1.1 Air Force Facility Missile Site #8 (571-7) Military
Reservation (Titan Missile Museum), near Tucson, AZ. Listed in
1992.
11.1.2 Space Launch Complex (SLC)-10/Thor, Vandenberg AFB, CA
(National Historic Landmark). Listed in 1986.
11.1.3 Launch Pads 5,6,13,14,19,26,34, and Mission Control
Center, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, Patrick AFB, FL. Listed in
1984.
11.1.4 Launch Complex 39, Kennedy Space Center, FL. Listed in
1973.
11.2 The following properties are considered exceptionally
significant Cold War resources and have been determined eligible for the
National Register by the Air Force:
11.2.1 "Minuteman II ICBM System"; significance confirmed in
Environmental Impact Statements and Records of Decision for MMII
drawdown at Ellsworth AFB, SD and Whiteman AFB, MO, dated 18 Nov 91 and
19 Oct 92, respectively.
11.2.3 Bomarc Missile Site, McGuire AFB, NJ.
11.3 Other assets which appear potentially eligible
include SAC headquarters, SAC alert facilities, the "Looking Glass"
operation (24 hour airborne command post), the Air Force Academy at
Colorado Springs, and numerous testing, training, and operational
missile facilities at Vandenberg AFB (e.g., Oak Mountain telemetry,
Tranquillion Peak Radar, Titan processing facility, SLC-3/Atlas and
Thor).
12.0 WHAT ASSETS ARE NOT CONSIDERED EXCEPTIONALLY SIGNIFICANT
HISTORIC PROPERTIES OF THE COLD WAR AND THEREFORE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR
LISTING ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER?
12.1 Our reading of "exceptional significance" excludes many real
property assets which are typically the subject of Section 106
consultations on older, pre-WWII bases, e.g., family housing
(Capehart, Wherry, etc), BOQs, base exchanges, administrative buildings,
garages & motor pools, maintenance shops, sewage treatment plants,
etc. The Air Force will instead focus specifically on operational
missions and equipment of unmistakable national importance and a
direct, not merely temporal, Cold War relationship. 'Me vast
support complex that lay behind the "frontline" combat or intelligence
units will, in due time, be inventoried for historic significance.
Limited funds and the need to act quickly argues for this system of
priorities.
12.2 We anticipate that most hangars may not meet the criteria
of exceptional significance. However, only a good, hard look by
knowledgeable people can verify this. Once a base has conducted an
in-house assessment per para 12.4, provides this documentation to higher
headquarters and the SHPO for review and comment, and addresses any
changes, unexceptional properties can be excluded from further
consideration under Section 106.
13.0 WHO DESIGNATES THE PROPERTIES IN PARA 10 AND 11 AND HOW
SHOULD BASES TREAT THEM REGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH SECTIONS 106 AND 110
OF THE NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT?
13.1 As stated earlier, a preliminary list of properties will be
developed and provided to the following parties for comment: the public
at large, combat & combat support personnel, military historians,
civil engineers, scientists, engineers, and technicians (individuals,
companies and corporations, professional societies), preservation
specialists, historians, and historical architects. The refined list
will constitute the initial Air Force Cold War inventory.
13.2 From an agency perspective, determinations of
significance are and will be made in two contexts. For routine
compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act
and 36 CFR 800.4(b) & (c), the base makes the determination of
significance in consultation with the MAJCOM. Mr. Gary Vest, SAF/MIQ,
is the Air Force Federal Preservation Officer and makes final agency
determinations of significance for listing on the National Register per
36 CFR 60.9(d).
13.3 Once a property has been identified as meeting the
criteria of historic significance established here, any undertaking
potentially affecting that property will be coordinated with the SHPO
and Advisory Council for review and comment. All the provisions of 36
CFR 800 apply, per SAF/MIQ policy memo of 9 Oct 92. Potential actions
include those that change the function of the facility or that change
essential features, qualities, characteristics, and other elements which
contribute to the property's exceptional significance and that are
critical to conveying the significance of the resource or in defining
its association with important historical themes and developments.
These include any activities requiring Air Force funding, licensing,
approval, or granting of assistance on any property.
13.4 We anticipate that an Air Force wide inventory will be
developed to confirm the identification of these historic CW properties.
In the meantime, bases should take the following steps.
13.4.1 The Base Historic Preservation Officer should organize
a meeting of knowledgeable installation personnel (civil engineering
staff, historian, museum, operations, logistics, etc.) within 60 days of
publication of this guidance. Within 30 days of such a meeting, develop
a "strawman" list of potential Cold War era properties of
exceptional significance for the base. Failure to perform such an
assessment could result in large portions of the base, or the entire
base, being inappropriately designated "significant."
13.4.2 Forward the results of this initial screening to the
MAJCOM Cultural Resources Manager. After review (maximum 10 days), the
MAJCOM will forward this report to HQ USAF/CEVP, the DoD Cold War Task
Area Manager, and the AF Cold War Working Group. Within 30 days, these
offices will validate the report, recommend additional work to be
accomplished, or recommend changes. Air Staff then returns the report
through the MAJCOM for transmission to the base.
13.4.3 Depending on command action, the base provides the
survey report to the SHPO for comment/concurrence. This will be the
first regulatory step in establishing a list of significant Cold War
properties.
13.4.4 The base should identify any requirement for additional
inventory, study, curation, or protective treatment to higher command in
the Environmental Compliance Program A-106 System.
14.0 CONCLUDING REMARKS
14.1 The Air Force was a major player in winning the Cold War.
There are likely to be dozens of properties on (or off) CONUS bases
warranting designation as "exceptionally significant." Some exceptional
Cold War properties were located overseas and are no longer extant or in
the DoD inventory. Perhaps only a few physical assets remain from an
entire weapon system; these remains may be in a stateside or OCONUS
museum, tucked away on a comer of a large test facility, or languishing
in a semiactive facility. Only a comprehensive inventory can identify
these properties. This guidance is intended as an interim measure for
use while the service gears up for such an effort in the near
future.
No. 7: HISTORIC COLD WAR PROPERTIES
The Legislative Mandate
How Does An Installation Comply With This Legislation?
With the defeat of the Axis powers in World War II,
international politics and conditions affecting postwar American
strategy changed radically. Even as the National Military Establishment
came into being in 1947, the older Eurocentric order yielded to a
bipolar world in which the United States and the Soviet Union became the
centers of two contending blocs representing fundamentally opposed
political ideologies. In this international setting, underdeveloped
areas and emerging nations in the so-called Third World sought to broker
their own independent futures, often with the superpower aid and
assistance.
The end of the war with Japan also witnessed the dawn of the nuclear
age with its subsequent stockpiles of weapons and delivery systems. The
American monopoly on nuclear power was broken with the Soviet
acquisition of an atomic weapon in 1949 and by the late 1960s, a
deliberately contrived nuclear weapons parity existed between the two
superpowers. Each was deterred from direct hostile acts against the
other by the knowledge that in a general war, victory could only be
Pyrrhic. Amid conditions of nuclear stalemate, the American defense
establishment sought to contain an opponent perceived as implacably
hostile and bent on constant aggrandizement. Several limited conflicts
raged on the periphery of superpower influence in countries seen as
client states of the respective superpowers. Yielding anywhere
threatened to tumble local commitments and alliances like so many
dominoes.
After nearly a half century punctuated by two major and protracted
conflicts, several simmering ones, and constant tension over client
state loyalties, the Cold War drew to a close with the collapse and
dissolution of one of the principal contenders. The Soviet Union
succumbed to the increasing internal contradictions of its sclerotic
economic system and a political structure resistant to change and
sustained in power by an elaborate police and propaganda network.
The Mission of the Department of Defense in the Cold War
The Secretary of Defense is the principal assistant to the
President of the United States in all matters relating to defense. The
Secretary exercises direction, authority, and control within the
DoD. As a result of the Amendments to the National Security Act in
August 1949, the powers of the Secretary expanded and DoD consolidated
over the years.
The DoD's primary mission during the Cold War era was to deter
general war by maintaining sufficient American forces to contest any
overt Soviet expansion, principally along the demarcation lines in
Europe and Asia established at the end of World War II. After the
Korean conflict of 1950-1953, American defense policy sought to keep an
ability to fight a "war and a half": one in the main theater of
interest, central Europe, and a second, smaller one, elsewhere.
In the succeeding years of the massive retaliation policy under the
Eisenhower Administration, the nation relied on Strategic Air
Command-manned bombers and the forward-based, nuclear-capable aircraft
of Navy aircraft carriers and Air Force tactical air forces as nuclear
weapons platforms. These were to be supplemented with an
intercontinental ballistic missile force and, by late 1960, by ballistic
missile-firing submarines. Together, land- and sea-based missiles and
manned bombers became known as the strategic "triad." Deliberate
redundancy among these weapon systems guaranteed the survival of enough
force to devastate any attacker. In addition, U.S. national policy
sought to maintain sufficient force to counteract Soviet influence in
the world's "gray areas," those developing localities where the
Communist Bloc supported so-called wars of national liberation, usually
against former colonial powers or client governments of the Western
Alliance.
The United States acted in concert with its traditional allies and
formed new alliances for the pursuit of common strategies. The nation
underwrote three major regional coalitions. The most noteworthy of
these, the Europe-based North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO),
comprising 12 original signatories in 1949, has survived the Cold War,
although its clear adversary, the Warsaw Pact, formed in 1955, dissolved
with the collapse of Soviet Communism. The Southeast Asia Treaty
Organization (SEATO) of 1955, with eight members, existed to offset the
power of Communist China and deflect the Communist-controlled national
liberation movements. The arrangement always suffered from conflicting
political allegiances within the region, contributed little to the
American effort during the Vietnam War, and was dissolved in 1977.
Though not a signatory or member nation, the United States also endorsed
the Central Treaty Organization (CENTO), originally the Baghdad Pact of
1955, and sought to influence political conditions in south Asia in
favor of American policies.
Containment
Throughout the Cold War, American forces maintained the
ability to project American power abroad in support of national foreign
policy. Naval forces in particular were engaged in continuous patrol in
the Mediterranean after a U.S. presence was established there as early
as 1946. The Truman Doctrine, announced in 1947, pledged American help
to legitimate governments battling insurgent forces. The doctrine was
itself considered the first application of the evolving containment
policy. The U.S. Navy also sailed in contested waters separating the
Chinese Nationalist Government on Taiwan and its Communist counterpart
on the mainland of China.
Containment came to be played out in a series of smaller, localized
conflicts rather than in a direct confrontation between the two
superpowers. The call-up of military and air reserve forces helped
resolve the Berlin Crisis of 1961. Washington was also inclined to use
force in the sensitive Caribbean basin, site of the strategic Panama
Canal. The protection of American interests in this region and along
the southern border of the United States included the quarantine of Cuba
during the missile crisis of 1962, the intervention in the Dominican
Republic in 1965, the Grenada intervention of October 1983, and the
Panama operation of 1989.
International Military Presence
The DoD maintained offensive and defensive forces as far as
possible from American borders and vital possessions and, conversely, as
close as possible to the potential adversary's territory. This strategy
led to the establishment early in the post-World War II period of a
worldwide base system far exceeding what had been thought necessary to
protect American possessions in the Hawaii, Panama, and the Philippines,
before 1941.
In Europe, the Allied occupation gave way in 1955 to a close relation
with the Federal Republic of Germany, which regained sovereign status
and a military force in that year. The nearly 50-year sojourn of an
entire American field army and American air forces in peacetime Germany
was a hallmark of the era. The American military presence,
initially a constabulary force, continued to serve as a trip-wire in a
confrontation that threatened to become a world war if the Soviet
armored host facing them violated the border between the two Germanys
that formed the original Iron Curtain. The stationing of American
Service dependents in Germany symbolized American commitments overseas
because the families of fighting men were placed in harm's way in the
event of hostilities.
Similarly, the American line of defense in the Pacific placed
deployed forces as far west as possible. U.S. forces operated from, and
were stationed at, bases in Guam, Japan, Korea, Okinawa, the
Philippines, Thailand, and a number of other Pacific islands. The
evidence of this presence-buildings, weapons systems and their
associated facilities, intelligence-gathering functions, and equipment,
and the ships and aircraft that sustained the forward elements-lie
scattered across the Pacific. They provide testimony to the long
logistical lifelines and intermediate bases that supported American
forces abroad.
Social Issues
The effects of domestic social issues on DoD threaten to
impinge on defense readiness. Aside from a belief in basic human
rights, a reason for greater racial integration within the armed
Services was the urge to deny American ideological opponents an
exploitable human issue. Despite strains, the Services moved ahead of
the rest of American society in guaranteeing equality of treatment for
minorities after a Presidential Executive Order of 1948 directed the
desegregation of the military. Later developments opened more
opportunities to women as well. By the end of the Cold War the idea of
women serving in combat roles was being given serious consideration.
During periods of the Cold War, the military establishment faced the
pressures brought about by the extension or reinstatement of the
Selective Service System, or draft. The draft, together with the
construction of the entire North American Air Defense-Civil Defense
effort, markedly affected the domestic intellectual and social
consciousness of Americans during the Cold War, often serving as the
flashpoint for violently opposing views.
Technological Change
Developments in communications, radar, aircraft, nuclear
submarines and carriers, space, and nuclear energy were largely driven
by military and intelligence imperatives during the Cold War. The
American defense establishment was anxious to promote and to profit from
these technological advances, yet struggled with the resulting financial
impact of the rising costs of weapon systems. Although conventional
weapons decreased in number, their individual lethality increased.
The Departments of the Army, the Navy, and the Air Force
These departments, no longer at cabinet level after the passage
of the 1949 Amendments to the National Security Act of 1947, were each
responsible for raising, training, and equipping forces that operate on
land, at sea, or in the air. These forces and their equipment came
under operational control of commanders of unified and specified
commands charged with actual combat missions and operations. The
military Services provided the research, development, and procurement
support necessary to keep combat- efficient forces.
The Department of the Army furnished forward-deployed ground troops
to unified commands and maintained land forces at home for rapid
commitment to areas of vital U.S. interests. It dominated the
activities of military assistance advisory groups (MAAGs) who managed
military assistance programs (MAPs) for signatories of defensive
alliances and other clients. The Army maintained and administered a
large reserve component base for overseas deployment. It also deployed
shorter-range tactical nuclear weapons in Europe.
The Army's air-mobility concept was initially conceived in the
1950's. It was not developed and applied extensively until experiments
in the early 1960's validated the utility of combat helicopters for an
extensive role in Vietnam. During that conflict the Army operated more
aircraft than the Air Force.
The Army maintained a ready-reaction force in the XVIII Airborne
Corps, comprising two airborne divisions meant for rapid deployment to
threatened areas of the world. In the "war-and-a-half" strategy,
the airborne forces would have been committed as an advance force to any
threatened area other than Europe and Korea.
The Army deployed the Jupiter intermediate ballistic missile (IRBM)
until it transferred the system to the Air Force as a result of a
decision in late 1956 that limited Army missiles to a 200-mile range.
Army units continued to control some tactical nuclear weapons.
Conventional artillery could also fire nuclear shells. Later
deployments of medium-range Lance, Pershing, ground-launched cruise
missiles (GLCM), and nuclear missiles in Europe could be seen as ,
helping to destabilize Soviet planning and putting added pressure on the
Communist regime as it approached its final crisis.
Army ground forces played direct roles in several crises and wars:
the Korean War, the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Dominican Republic
intervention, the Vietnam War, the Grenada intervention, and the
successive Berlin crises.
Throughout the post-World War II period, the Army also supplied
the administrative structure and usually the senior commander for
occupation authorities in Germany, Japan, and, in one notably
long-lasting case, Okinawa.
The Department of the Navy prepared to deter and fight war by
developing sea forces to control distant waters, crisis points within
reach of blue water, and lines of communications to forward deployed
forces.
It contributed to the nuclear triad of forces by deploying
nuclear-armed aircraft on forward-based carriers and missile submarines
capable of striking strategic targets deep within a potential
adversary's heartland and maintained control of the sea by deployment of
antisubmarine forces and carrier battle groups. The development of
the Navy's underwater-launched Polaris, Poseidon, and Trident
nuclear ballistic missiles was among the major technical accomplishments
of the era. Because of their mobility and invulnerability to attack,
these submarines significantly bolstered the U.S. strategic deterrence
capability.
The Service remained capable of projecting American power and
influence ashore by aircraft from Enterprise- and
Nimitz-class nuclear-powered carriers and Forrestal-class
conventional carriers, by amphibious operations, by fleet marine forces,
naval gunfire, coastal and river operations, naval special warfare, and
supporting sealift.
Navy ships maintained and supported larger overseas deployments of
American combat forces, including those of the Army and the Air Force,
by contributing to seaborne transport and resupply.
Marine forces landed in Korea, in Lebanon in 1958, and were among the
first units committed in the Vietnam War. Forward deployment in these
countries with naval forces and Marine aviation demonstrated quick
response by Navy and Marine forces in these crises.
The Department of the Air Force maintained air elements for the
control of national airspace and sustained the ability to project
massive retaliatory force against a potential adversary's homeland by
missiles and land-based manned bombers. Manned bombers were the Convair
B-36; the North American B-45, B-57, and B-58 Hustler; the Martin B-57;
the Douglas B-66; and the Boeing B-29, B-47 Stratojet, B-50, and B-52
Stratofortress. The latter was among the most enduring instruments of
the period, the mainstay of the Air Force's Strategic Air Command for
nearly 25 years. Its G- and H-models remained in service even after the
introduction of the B-1A Lancer and the later B-2 Stealth bombers.
The Air Force deployed both intermediate range ballistic missiles
(IRBMs)-the Thor and Jupiter--and ICMBs-beginning with the Atlas series
and followed by the Titans, Minutemen, and, last, the MX Peacekeeper.
Technological advances perfected an air-launched cruise missile (ALCM)
that could be programmed to strike distant targets.
The Air Force maintained tactical air forces to seize air superiority
from potential enemy air forces, to operate in support of U.S. Army
forces engaged with an enemy on land, and to interdict enemy movements,
forces, and lines of communications leading to areas in which friendly
troops were engaged.
The Air Force provided air transport and airlift for deploying
troops, cargo, and humanitarian aid in support of national policy.
Perhaps the most notable example of how transport aircraft contributed
to American resolve in the Cold War was the Berlin Airlift in 1948 and
1949, in which allied aircraft brought nearly 2.5 million tons of food
and supplies to the citizens of Berlin.
The Air Force shared with the CIA and NSA a focal activity of the
Cold War: intelligence gathering. It concentrated on technical means,
including the use of specially designed aircraft (U-2, SR-71) and
earth-orbiting satellites that collected imagery for relay to ground
stations. The Air Force supplied technical expertise, launch
facilities, and rocket vehicles to place reconnaissance satellites in
orbit.
The Department of Energy: Defense Programs of the Nuclear Weapons
Complex
The DoE and its predecessor agencies, have contributed to the
national security of the United States since 1942. The Manhattan
Project of the U.S. Army, the Atomic Energy Commission and its
successors, the Energy Research and Development Administration, and,
since 1977, DoE, have had the mission of providing and maintaining safe,
secure, reliable, and survivable nuclear weapons.
Responsibilities included the research, design, development, testing,
manufacture, surveillance, and disposal of U.S. nuclear weapons. The
mission broadened to include nuclear propulsion systems for the Navy and
space power applications for DoD and NASA.
The end of the Cold War affected DoD's mission, leading to
reconfiguration of weapon systems with major implications for national
security, environmental restoration and waste management, and cultural
resource management.
Summary: Cold War Imperatives
Facing an enemy with an apparently messianic mission, demanding
global expansion by arms or subversion, American armed might during the
Cold War remained proportionally greater than at any other time of
nominal peace in American history. Whereas American military and naval
deployments before 1941 had been confined to limited garrisons in Panama
and the Philippines, military commitments now assumed a global defensive
character. Defense appropriations were consistently the largest element
of the annual budget and a large part of the nation's scientific genius
and wherewithal went into weapon and other defense-related research.
Direct defense outlays for 1989, the year that the Berlin Wall came
down, amounted to $303.6 billion or 5.7 percent of the gross domestic
product for the year.
The Soviet Union's successes in consolidating and controlling a bloc
in eastern Europe in the early years of the Cold War and the victory of
Chinese Communism in the same period contributed to a pervasive sense of
danger and threat in the United States. During the 1950's, the nation
witnessed years of hysteria over a presumed enemy infiltration of the
government and its military departments.
Well after the abatement of McCarthyism, military manpower
requirements touched the life of every young male in America, especially
in time of conflict. Until 1973, registration with the Selective
Service became a rite of passage for each 18 year-old man in the
population. Attitudes toward conscript military service became
noticeably hostile between the end of World War II and the end of the
Vietnam War. The latter conflict produced an abiding counterculture in
the United States critical of previous Cold War assumptions about the
use of military power against Communist interests. That sentiment did
not, however, permanently cripple advances in military technologies and
DoD spending through the end of the Cold War. The military departments
trained their people to maintain a high state of combat readiness that
positioned them to mobilize quickly in events that called for a
non-nuclear military response across the globe.
The closing of the Cold War, defined in terms of the end of the
bipolar strategic equation, finds the United States redefining its
global commitments, reassessing its force structure, and restructuring
DoD to adapt to a new and uncertain role in world affairs.
May 7: German military leaders surrender
unconditionally to Eisenhower at Rheims, France.
July 3: Berlin: Allied troops complete occupation of
Berlin.
July 16: Atomic bomb: United States explodes first atomic bomb
at Alamogordo, New Mexico, in a test code-named TRINITY.
August 6: Atomic bomb: United States drops atomic bomb on
Hiroshima.
August 9: Atomic bomb: United States drops second atomic bomb
on Nagasaki.
August 14: Japan surrenders.
August 26: Korea: United States announces its intention to occupy
Japanese-held Korea south of the 38th parallel; Soviet Union to occupy
the north.
September 2: Vietnam: Ho Chi Minh's troops seize power in Hanoi
and proclaim an independent Vietnam.
September 22: Vietnam: French forces return to Vietnam.
November 5: Hungarian election: Communist party wins only 17
percent of the vote. Stalin moves to eradicate opposition and to
consolidate the Soviet position in Hungary.
November 29: Yugoslavia becomes a federated republic under
Marshal Tito.
1945-1946 Iran: America and Great Britain withdraw their troops
from Iran; the Soviet Union does not.
The bibliography listed here is only a small
sampling of the vast secondary literature produced in recent years by
historians, historic preservationists, political scientists, and
specialists in international and cultural relations. The collection
includes technical bulletins necessary to the analysis of the Cold War
material culture and documents that explain the laws pertaining to
Federal records. The Cold War Task Area has been charged to account for
both the literary legacy and physical remains of DoD as related to the
Cold War. The secondary literature reflects the range of subjects,
events, themes, and places that create the Cold War context for DoD
textual and non-textual materials, sites, structures, landscapes, and
artifacts. This selected bibliography should serve as a descriptive
base for a more comprehensive bibliography to be produced in the next
stage of the Cold War Task Area.
Few of the official books and articles produced by the Federal
historians who work for the various DoD history offices are included
here. One project that many scholars hope to see emerge from the Cold
War Task Area, and the broader Legacy Resource Management Program, is a
comprehensive, DoD-wide survey of published and unpublished studies from
the Cold War era. That work should, if possible, be done by DoD
historians themselves and will be included in later Cold War History
Project bibliographic reports.
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. Balancing Historic
Preservation Needs with the Operation of Highly Technical or Scientific
Facilities. Washington, DC: Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation, February 1991.
Allison, Graham, and Gregory F. Treverton, eds. Rethinking America’s
Security: Beyond the Cold War to the New World Order. New
York: Norton, 1992.
Alperovitz, Gar. Atomic Diplomacy: Hiroshima and Potsdam. Rev.
ed. New York: Penguin Books, 1985.
Ambrose, Stephen E. Rise to Globalism: American Foreign Policy,
1938-1976. New York: Penguin Books, 1977.
Aronson, James. The Press and the Cold War. New York: Monthly
Review Press, 1970.
Axelsson, Arne. Restrained Response: American Novels of the Cold
War Era, 1945-1962. New York: Greenwood Press, 1990.
Bacevich, A.J. The Pentomic Era: The U.S. Army Between Korea and
Vietnam. Washington, National Defense University Press, 1986.
Baritz, Loren. Backfire: American Culture and the Vietnam War.
New York: Ballantine Books, 1986.
Beatty, John. "Genetics in the Atomic Age: The Atomic Bomb Casualty
Commission, 1947-1956." in The Expansion of American Biology.
New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1991.
Belfrage, Cedric. The American Inquisition, 1945-1960: A Profile of
the "McCarthy Era." New York: Thunders Mouth Press, 1989.
Bennett, Edward M. Franklin D. Roosevelt and the Search for
Security: American-Soviet Relations, 1933-1939. Wilmington,
DE: Scholarly Resources Press, 1985.
Beschloss, Michael R., and Strobe Talbott. At the Highest Levels:
The Inside Story of the End of the Cold War. Boston: Little,
Brown and Company, 1993.
Betts, Richard K. Soldiers, Statesmen, and Cold War Crises.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1977.
Biskind, Peter. Seeing is Believing: How Hollywood Taught Us to Stop
Worrying and Love the Fifties. New York: Pantheon Books, 1983.
Blaker, James R. United States Overseas Basing: An Anatomy of the
Dilemma. New York: Praeger, 1990.
Blumenthal, Sidney. Pledging Allegiance: The Last Campaign of the
Cold War. New York: Harper Perennial, 1991.
Bobbitt, Philip. Democracy and Deterrence: The History and Future
of Nuclear Strategy. London: Macmillan Press, 1988.
Bogart, Leo. Social Research and the Desegregation of the U.S. Army:
Two Original 1951 Field Reports. Chicago: Markham Pub.
Co., 1969.
Borowski, Harry, ed. Military Planning in the Twentieth Century.
Washington, DC: Office of Air Force History, 1984.
-----------. "Capability and the Development of Strategic Air Command
1946-1950." Ph.D. diss., University of California, Santa Barbara,
1976.
Boyer, Paul. By the Bombs Early Light: American Thought and Culture
at the Dawn of the Nuclear Age. New York: Pantheon Books,
1985.
Brodie, Bernard. Strategy in the Missile Age. Princeton, NJ:
Princeton University Press, 1959.
Brown, Archie, ed. Political Leadership in the Soviet Union.
Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990.
Brzezinski, Zbigniew, and Samuel Huntington. Political Power:
USA/USSR. New York: Viking Press, 1964.
Bundy, McGeorge. Danger and Survival: Choices About the Bomb in the
First Fifiy Years. New York: Random House, 1988.
Burk, Robert Fredrick. The Eisenhower Administration and Black Civil
Rights. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1984.
Campbell, Duncan. The Unsinkable Aircraft Carrier: American
Military Power in Britain. London: Michael Joseph, 1984.
Carter, Ashton B., and David N. Schwartz. Ballistic Missile Defense.
Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1984.
Chafe, William H., and Harvard Sitkoff, eds. A History of Our Time:
Readings on Postwar America. 2d ed. New York: Oxford
University Press, 1987.
Chang, Laurence, and Peter Kornbluh, eds. The Cuban Missile Crisis,
1962: A National Security Archive Document Reader. New York: The
New Press, 1992.
Clements, Kendrick A., ed. James Byrnes and the Origins of the Cold
War. Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press, 1982.
Clowse, Barbara. "Education as an Instrument of National Security:
The Cold War Campaign to 'Beat the Russians' from Sputnik to the
National Defense Education Act of 1958." Ph.D. diss., University of
North Carolina, Chapel Hill, 1977.
Coffey, Joseph I. Strategic Power and National Security.
Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1971.
Crabb, Cecil V., Jr. American Foreign Policy in the Nuclear Age.
3d ed. New York: Harper and Row, 1972.
Cragg, Dan. Guide to Military Installations. 3d. ed.
Harrisburg, PA: Stackpole Books, 1991.
Dallek, Robert. The American Style of Foreign Policy: Cultural
Politics and Foreign Affairs. New York: Mentor Books, 1984.
Davis, Benjamin O., Jr. Benjamin O. Davis, Jr., American. New
York: Plume, 1992.
Davis, Richard. The 31 Initiatives: A Study in Air Force-Army
Cooperation. Washington, DC: Office of Air Force History, 1987.
Degler, Carl. Affluence and Anxiety: America Since 1945. 2d ed.
New York: Scott Foresman, 1979.
Dewar, James. "Project Rover: A Study of the Nuclear Rocket
Development Program, 19531963." Ph.D. diss., Kansas State University,
1974.
Dickson, Paul. Timelines: Day by Day and Trend by Trend from the
Dawn of the Atomic Age to the Gulf War. Reading, MA:
Addison Wesley, 1990.
Dingman, Roger. "Atomic Diplomacy During the Korean War."
International Security 13, no. 3 (winter 1988-89).
Divine, Robert. Blowing on the Wind: The Nuclear Test Ban Debate,
1954-1960. New York: Oxford University Press, 1978.
Dower, John W. War Without Mercy: Race and Power in the Pacific
War. New York: Pantheon Books, 1987.
Dunn, Lewis A. Controlling the Bomb: Nuclear Proliferation in the
1980. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1982.
Engler, Richard E. Atomic Power in Space. Washington, DC:
Department of Energy, 1987.
Evangelista, Matthew A. "Stalin's Postwar Army Reappraised."
International Security 7, no. 3 (winter 1982-83).
Foot, Rosemary J. "Nuclear Coercion and the Ending of the Korean
Conflict." International Security 13, no. 3 (winter
1988-89).
Foreign Relations of the United States. Series. Washington, DC:
U.S. Government Printing Office, n.d.
Freeland, Richard. "Cold War Mobilization." Ph.D. diss., University of
Pennsylvania, 1969.
Fried, Richard M. Nightmare in Red: The McCarthy Era in
Perspective. New York: Oxford University Press. 1990.
Gabriel, Richard, and Paul L. Savage. Crisis in Command:
Mismanagement in the Army. New York: Hill and Wang, 1978.
Gaddis, John Lewis. The Long Peace: Inquiries into the History of
the Cold War. New York: Oxford University Press, 1987.
-----------. The United States and the Origins of the Cold War:
1941-1947. New York: Columbia University Press, 1972.
-----------. The United States and the End of the Cold War:
Implications, Reconsideration, Provocations. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1992.
Gaddis, John Lewis, and Thomas H. Etzold, eds. Containment:
Documents on American Policy and Strategy, 1945-1950. New
York: Columbia University Press, 1978.
Gardner, Lloyd C., Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., and Hans J. Morgenthau.
The Origins of the Cold War. Waltham, MA:
Ginn-Blaisdell, 1970.
Garthoff, Raymond L. Detente and Confrontation: American-Soviet
Relations from Nixon to Reagan. Washington, DC: Brookings
Institution, 1985.
George, Alexander L., and Richard Smoke. Deterrence in American
Foreign Policy: Theory and Practice. New York: Columbia
University Press, 1974.
Gerber, Michele Stenehjern. On the Home Front: The Cold War Legacy
of the Hanford Nuclear Site. Lincoln: University of
Nebraska, 1992.
Gilbert, James. Another Chance: Postwar America, 1945-1985. 2d
ed. Chicago: Dorsey Press, 1986.
Gillon, Steven M., and Diane B. Kunz. America During the Cold War.
Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc., 1993.
Gitlin, Todd. The Sixties: Years of Hope, Days of Rage. New
York: Bantam Books, 1987.
Goin, Peter. Nuclear Landscapes. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins
University Press, 1991.
Graebner, Norman A. Cold War Diplomacy, 1945-1960. Princeton,
NJ: D. Van Nostrand & Co., 1962.
-----------.,ed. The Cold War: Ideological Conflict or Power
Struggle? Boston: D. C. Heath & Co., 1963.
Gray, Colin S. "National Style in Strategy: The American Example."
International Security 6, no. 2 (fall 1981).
Grele, Ronald J. "On Using Oral History Collections: An Introduction."
Journal of American History 74 (Sept. 1987).
Gustafson, Milton, ed. The National Archives and Foreign Relations
Research. Athens: Ohio University Press, 1974.
Guttman, Allen. Korea: Cold War and Limited War. 2d ed.
Lexington, MA: Heath, 1972.
Haas, Joan, Helen Willa Samuels, and Barbara Trippel Simmons.
Appraising the Records of Modern Science and Technology: A
Guide. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1985.
Halle, Louis J. The Cold War as History. New York: Harper
& Row, 1967.
Hamilton, Herbert. "Social Bases of Opinion in the Cold War American
Army." Ph.D. diss., University of Chicago, 1963.
Hammond, Thomas T., ed. Witnesses to the Origins of the Cold War.
Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1982.
Hauser, William L. America’s Army in Crisis. Baltimore: Johns
Hopkins University Press, 1973.
Herken, Gregg. The Winning Weapon: The Atomic Bomb in the Cold War,
1945-1950. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1988.
Herring, George F. America’s Longest War: The United States and
Vietnam, 1950-1976. 2d ed. New York: Wiley, 1986.
Hewes, James E. From Root to McNamara: Department of Defense
Organization, 1900-1963. Washington DC: U.S. Government Printing
Office, 1975.
Hewlett, Richard G., and Francis Duncan. Atomic Shield, 1947-1952.
Vol. 2, A History of the Atomic Energy Commission.
Reprint. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1990.
-----------. Nuclear Navy, 1947-1962. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1974.
Hewlett, Richard G., and Jack M. Holl. Atoms for Peace and War: The
Eisenhower Administration and the Atomic Energy Commission, 1953-1961.
Vol. 3, A History of the Atomic Energy Commission. Berkeley:
University of California Press, 1989.
Hine, Thomas. Populuxe: The Look and Life of America in the '50s
and '60s, from Tailfins and TV Dinners to Barbie Dolls and Fallout
Shelters. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1987.
Hodgson, Godfrey. America in Our Time: From World War II to Nixon,
What Happened and Why. New York: Vintage Books, 1978.
Hofstadter, Richard. Anti-Intellectualism in American Life. New
York: Vintage Books, 1963.
Hogan, Michael J., ed. The End of the Cold War: Its Meaning and
Implications. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1992.
Hoopes, Townsend, and Douglas Brinkley. Driven Patriot: The Life
and Times of James Forrestal. New York: Alfred A. Knopf,
1992.
Inglis, Fred. The Cruel Peace: Everyday Life and the Cold War.
New York: Basic Books, 1991.
Jacobsen, Carl G. Strategic Power: USA/USSR. New York: St.
Martin's Press, 1990.
Jeffreys-Jones, Rhodri. The CIA and American Democracy. New
Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1989.
Jensen, Joan M. Army Surveillance in America, 1775-1980. New
Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1991.
Jensen, Kenneth M., ed. Origins of the Cold War: The Novikov,
Kennan, and Roberts Long Telegrams of 1946. Washington, DC:
U.S. Institute of Peace, 1991.
Jervis, Robert. "The Military History of the Cold War." Diplomatic
History: The Journal of the Society for Historians of American
Foreign Relations 15, no. 1 (winter 1991).
-----------. The Illogic of American Nuclear Strategy. Ithaca,
NY: Cornell University Press, 1984.
-----------. "The Political Effects of Nuclear Weapons."
International Security 13, no. 2 (fall 1988).
Johnson, Amos A., and William J. Taylor, Jr. American National
Security: Policy and Process. Rev. ed. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins
University Press, 1984.
Kahan, Jerome H. Security in the Nuclear Age. Washington, DC:
Brookings Institution, 1975.
Kaufmann, William. Planning Conventional Forces, 1950-1982.
Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1982.
Kennedy, Paul. The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers. New York:
Random House, 1987.
Kennedy, Robert F. Thirteen Days: A Memoir of the Cuban Missile
Crisis. New York: W. W. Norton, 1969.
Keohane, Robert O., Joseph S. Nye, and Stanley Hoffmann. After the
Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe,
1989-1991. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1993.
Kreger, Robert David. "The Making of an Industrial Landscape: Case
Studies of Air Force Bases, World War I to the Present." Ph.D. diss.,
University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, 1988.
Krepon, Michael. Strategic Stalemate: Nuclear Weapons and Arms
Control in American Politics. New York: St. Martin's Press,
1984.
LaFeber, Walter. America, Russia, and the Cold War, 1945-1966.
5th ed. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1985.
-----------. The Third Cold War. Waco, TX: Baylor University
Press, 1981.
Larson, Deborah Welch. Origins of Containment: A Psychological
Explanation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1985.
Leffler, Melvyn P. A Preponderance of Power. Stanford, CA:
Stanford University Press, 1992.
Linenthal, Edward Tabor. Sacred Ground: Americans and Their
Battlefields. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1991.
Loeffler, Jane C. "The Architecture of Diplomacy: Heyday of the United
States Embassy Building Program, 1954-1960." Journal of the Society
of Architectural Historians 49, no. 3 (Sept. 1990).
Logsdon, John M. The Decision to Go to the Moon: Project Apollo and
the National Interest. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1970.
Luttwak, Edward. The Pentagon and the Art of War. New York:
Simon and Schuster, 1984.
MacDonald, J. Fred. Television and the Red Menace: The Video Road
to Vietnam. New York: Praeger, 1985.
Maddox, Robert James. The New Left and the Origins of the Cold
War. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1973.
Maier, Charles S., ed. The Cold War in Europe: Era of a Divided
Continent. New York: Markus Wiener Publishing, 1991.
Mandelbaum, Michael. The Nuclear Question: The United States and
Nuclear Weapons, 1946 -1976. Cambridge, England: Cambridge
University Press, 1979.
Marden, David. "The Cold War and American Education." Ph.D. diss.,
University of Kansas, 1975.
Markusen, Ann, and Joel Yudken. Dismantling the Cold War Economy.
New York: Basic Books, 1992.
Markusen, Ann, Peter Hall, Scott Campbell, and Sabina Deitrick. The
Rise of the Gunbelt: The Military Remapping of Industrial
America. New York: Oxford University Press, 1991.
Martin, Laurence. NATO and the Defense of the West. New York:
Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1985.
Mastny, Vojtech. "Stalin and the Militarization of the Cold War."
International Security 9, no. 3 (winter 1983-84).
May, Elaine Tyler. Homeward Bound: American Families in the Cold
War Era. New York: Basic Books, 1988.
May, Larry. Recasting America: Culture and Politics in the Age of
the Cold War. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989.
McCauley, Martin, ed. Khrushchev and Khrushchevism.
Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1988.
McConnick, Thomas J. America’s Half-Century: United States
Foreign Policy in the Cold War. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins
University Press, 1989.
McNair, Brian. Images of the Enemy: Reporting the New Cold War.
New York: Rutledge. 1988.
Medhurst, Martin J. Cold War Rhetoric: Strategy, Metaphor and
Ideology. New York: Greenwood Press, 1990.
Minnesota Historical Society. Research Issues in Electronic Records:
Report of the Working Meeting. St. Paul: Minnesota
Historical Society, 1991.
Momyer, William. Air Power in Three Wars. Washington, DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office, 1978.
Moulton, Harland B. From Superiority to Parity: The United States
and the Strategic Arms Race, 1961-1971. Westport, CT:
Greenwood Press, 1973.
Mueller, John. "The Essential Irrelevance of Nuclear Weapons: Stability
in the Postwar World." International Security 13, no. 2 (fall
1988).
Nathan, James A., ed. The Cuban Missile Crisis Revisited. New
York: St. Martin's Press, 1992.
National Archives and Records Administration. Federal Records
Management: Laws and Regulations. Washington, DC: National
Archives and Records Administration, 1991.
Naylor, Thomas H. The Cold War Legacy. Lexington, MA:
Lexington Books, 1991.
-----------. "Saving the Right Stuff. A report and recommendation to
the Archivist of the United States on the appraisal of research and
development records of the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration," Aug. 1985.
Neufeld, Jacob. The Development of Ballistic Missiles in the United
States Air Force, 1945-1960. Washington, DC: Office of Air Force
History, 1990.
Neustadt, Richard E. Presidential Power: The Politics of Leadership
from FDR to Carter. Rev. ed. New York: Wiley, 1980.
Newhouse, John. War and Peace in the Nuclear Age. New York:
Alfred A. Knopf, 1989.
Oberdorfer, Don. The Turn: From the Cold War to a New Era, the
United States and the Soviet Union, 1983-1990. New York:
Poseidon Press, 1991.
Paret, Peter, ed. Makers of Modern Strategy: From Machiavelli to
the Nuclear Age. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press,
1986.
Pickerell, Albert. "The Battle of Men's Mind: America's 'Psychological
Offensive' in the 'Cold War."' Ph.D. diss., Stanford University,
1953.
Polmar, Norman. Strategic Weapons: An Introduction. New York:
Crane, Russak & Company, Inc., 1975.
Porro, Jeffrey, ed. The Nuclear Age Reader. New York: Alfred
A. Knopf, 1989.
Public Affairs Television. The Secret Government: The Constitution
in Crisis. Videotape. New York: 1987.
Ritchie, Donald A. "Oral History in the Federal Government,"
Journal of American History 74 (Sept. 1987).
Roberts, Geoffrey. The Unholy Alliance: Stalin’s Pact with Hitler.
Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990.
Robin, Ron. Enclaves of America: The Rhetoric of American Political
Architecture Abroad, 1900-1965. Princeton, NJ: Princeton
University Press, 1992.
Rosenberg, David Alan. "Origins of Overkill: Nuclear Weapons and
American Strategy, 1945-1960." International Security 7, no. 4
(spring 1983).
Rosenberg, Emily G. Spreading the American Dream: American Economic
and Cultural Expansion, 1890-1945. New York: Hill and Wang,
1982.
Sayre, Nora. Running Time: Films of the Cold War. New York:
Dial Press, 1982.
Schaffel, Kenneth. The Emerging Shield: The Air Force and the
Evolution of Continental Air Defense 1945-1960. Washington, DC:
Office of Air Force History, 1991.
Schelling, Thomas C. The Strategy of Conflict. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press, 1960; reprint, 1980.
-----------. Arms and Influence. New Haven, CT: Yale
University Press, 1966.
Schlesinger, Arthur M., Jr. "The Origins of the Cold War." Foreign
Affairs (Oct. 1967).
Sharnik, John. Inside the Cold War: An Oral History. New York:
Arbor House, 1987.
Sherfy, Marcella, and W. Ray Luce. Guidelines for Evaluating and
Nominating Properties That Have Achieved Significance Within the Last
Fifty Years. National Register Bulletin 22. Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Interagency Resources
Division, n.d.
Sherwin, Martin J. A World Destroyed: The Atomic Bomb and the Grand
Alliance. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1975.
Sklar, Robert. Movie-Made America: A Cultural History of American
Movies. New York: Vintage Books, 1975.
Smoke, Richard. National Security and the Nuclear Dilemma. New
York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1984.
Snyder, William P., and James Brown, eds. Defense Policy in the
Reagan Administration. Washington, DC: National Defense University
Press, 1988.
Taylor, Maxwell. The Uncertain Trumpet. New York: Harper
Brothers, 1959.
Thomas, Hugh. Armed Truce: The Beginnings of the Cold War,
1945-1946. New York: Athenaeum, 1987.
Thompson, Robert Smith. The Missiles of October: The Declassified
Story of John F Kennedy and the Cuban Missile Crisis. New York:
Simon and Schuster, 1992.
Titus, A. Costandina. Bombs in the Backyard: Atomic Testing and
American Politics. Reno: University of Nevada Press, 1986.
Trachtenberg, Marc. "A 'Wasting Asset': American Strategy and the
Shifting Nuclear Balance, 1949-1954." International Security 13,
no. 3 (winter 1988-89).
U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment. Technologies for
Prehistoric and Historic Preservation. Washington, DC: U.S.
Government Printing Office, Sept. 1986.
Wallace, Mike. "Industrial Museums and the History of
Deindustrialization." The Public Historian 9, no. 1
(winter 1987).
Walton, Richard J. Cold War and Counter-Revolution: The
Foreign Policy of John E Kennedy. New York: Viking, 1972.
Weigley, Russell. The American Way of War. New York:
Macmillan, 1974.
Wells, Samuel F., Jr. "The United States and the Present
Danger." Journal of Strategic Studies 4, no. I (March 1981).
-----------. "The Origins of Massive Retaliation." Political
Science Quarterly (spring 1981).
Wetherell, Charles, et al. "Managing Cultural Resource Information:
The California Experience." Public Historian 9, no. 1 (winter
1987).
Whitfield, Stephen J. The Culture of the Cold War.
Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1991.
Williams, William Appleman. American-Russian Relations, 1781-1947.
New York: Holt, Rinehart, 1952.
Worland, Eric John. "Me Other Living-Room War: Evolving Cold War
Imagery in Popular TV Programs of the Vietnam Era, 1960-1975." Ph.D.
diss., University of California,Los Angeles, 1989.
-----------. The Tragedy of American Diplomacy. Rev. ed. New
York: Dell, 1962.
Yarnarella, Ernest J. The Missile Defense Controversy: Strategy,
Technology, and Politics, 1955-1972. Lexington: University Press
of Kentucky, 1977.
Yergin, Daniel. Shattered Peace: The Origins of the Cold War and
the National Security State. New York: Penguin Books, 1976.
Young, Marilyn B. The Vietnam Wars, 1945-1990. New York:
Harper Perennial, 1991.
Zumwalt, Elmo. On Watch: A Memoir. New York: Quadrangle,
1983.
B-1(B) bomber: Manned U.S. intercontinental bomber. Program canceled by Carter Administration but resurrected under Reagan with redesigned aircraft known as B-1B.
Bay of Pigs: An unsuccessful invasion of Cuba by 1500 Cuban exiles with U.S. Government support on April 17, 1961.
Berlin Airlift: The supply of vital necessities to West Berlin by U.S. aircraft from June 1948 through September 1949. The Soviets had hoped to force Allied abandonment of the city by establishing a water and land blockade, but the constant flow of American planes, totalling 277,000 flights with more than 2 million tons of supplies, kept West Berlin alive.
Berlin Wall: The fortified barrier erected by the East German government in August 1961 to divide East and West Berlin and halt the exodus of East Germans fleeing Communist rule.
BOMARC: Boeing Michigan Aeronautical Research Center; also surface-to-air anti-aircraft missile designed at BOMARC.
Bomber gap: The fear of Soviet superiority in the area of intercontinental bombers, which first arose in July 1957 after Soviets flew their Bear and Bison bombers past American observers multiple times, duping them into exaggerating Soviet capability.
Brussels Pact: Signatories of the Brussels Treaty, a 50-year treaty of economic, social, cultural, and defensive collaboration between Belgium, France, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, and the United Kingdom, signed March 17, 1948.
Carter Doctrine: President Carter's commitment to defend U.S. interests in the Persian Gulf, motivated by the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
Checkpoint Charlie: The American checkpoint and guardhouse at the border of East and West Berlin.
Containment: U.S. Cold War foreign policy toward the Soviet Union, first articulated by George Kennan in 1947 with his famous "X" article in Foreign Affairs. As originally articulated, the policy called for a vigilant but patient reaction to Soviet expansionism, emphasizing political and economic tools over military force.
Cuban Missile Crisis: The major Cold War confrontation between U.S. and Soviet forces over the deployment of Soviet IRBMs in Cuba in 1962. An American naval blockade and high alert status ensued until the crisis was defused by the removal of the Soviet missiles and an American pledge to dismantle IRBMs in Turkey and to never invade Cuba.
Detente: A lessening of tensions between the superpowers, primarily associated with the 1970's. The term is used loosely to describe either a situation or a policy.
DEW line: A distant early warning line of radar and communications equipment deployed along northern Alaska and Canada designed to detect and track Soviet ballistic missiles.
DMZ: De-Militarized Zone; refers to the unoccupied strip of land at the 38th parallel that divides North and South Korea.
Executive Order 12356: The current Executive Order setting protocol for the declassification of government documents.
Flexible response: A military strategy adopted by President Kennedy and Defense Secretary McNamara calling for a graduated escalation of force in response to aggression, in contrast to the previous doctrine of massive retaliation.
FFRDC: Federally funded research and development contractor.
FOIA: Freedom of Information Act. Federal legislation codifying the responsibility and protocol of Federal agencies for the provision of public access to government records.
HABS/HAER: Historic American Buildings Survey/Historic American Engineering Record.
Hawk Missile: "Homing all the way Killer," American surface-launched anti-aircraft missile.
ICBM: Intercontinental ballistic missile.
ICOMOS: International Council on Monuments and Sites.
INF: intermediate range nuclear forces. The 1987 INF Treaty, a landmark arms control agreement, provided for the removal and destruction of all INF weapons in Europe.
IRBM: intermediate range ballistic missile.
Iron Curtain: Term first used by Winston Churchill to describe the political barrier which had been erected between the East and West and the creation of spheres of influence.
Jupiter Missile: An early American IRBM. A squadron was removed quid pro quo to de-escalate the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Man in Space: National Historic Landmark theme study to document and preserve relics and resources of the NASA space program.
Massive retaliation: Eisenhower's military doctrine of threatening a full nuclear retaliatory response to any perceived aggression against U.S. interests; later replaced by flexible response because of its lack of credibility.
McCarthyism: The practices of Senator Joseph McCarthy to discredit American citizens through sensational and unsubstantiated accusations of Communist complicity.
Military-industrial complex: A phrase first coined by President Eisenhower in his 1961 farewell address describing the close linkage between the U.S. military and private contractors in the military industry.
Minuteman II: American ICBM entered into service in 1966.
Missile gap: The perceived Soviet superiority in ICBMs due to exaggerated estimates by the Gaither Committee in 1957 and USAF in the early 1960's.
MX missile: The most advanced U.S. ICBM in service, now known as the "Peacekeeper." It was supported by Carter and first deployed under Reagan in 1988.
National Security Act of 1947: This reorganization of the U.S. defense establishment created the office of the Secretary of Defense, the National Security Council (NSA), the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and the U.S. Air Force (USAF).
NIKE: A U.S. Army project begun in 1945 to develop missiles for air defense. Several NIKE missiles were developed and deployed, including the NIKE-Ajax and NIKE-Hercules.
NSC-68: An important U.S. foreign policy document of 1950, which reappraised America's global position vis-'a-vis Communist China and the Soviet Union. It called for a full-scale military build-up to confront Communism, which it saw as a monolithic force bent on world domination. It stressed the need to confront Communists anywhere in the world at any cost, as a gain for the Soviets would be regarded as a loss for America.
Rand Corporation: A government-sponsored "think tank" created in 1946 to study problems of national security.
Rapid Deployment Joint Task Force: Carter authorized the creation of this force of up to 200,000 troops for response to military emergencies around the world, primarily in response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.
SAC: Strategic Air Command; a now defunct component of the USAF with the mission of delivering Air Force strategic nuclear assets to targets overseas.
SALT I: Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty; signed in 1972, it froze numbers of ICBMs and SLBMs in place for 5 years and restricted the deployment of ABMs.
SDI: Strategic Defense Initiative; an ABM research program dedicated to finding technology to destroy incoming ICBMs. It was begun in 1983, after Reagan's "Star Wars" speech in which he called on the nation's scientific community to "give us the means of rendering these nuclear weapons impotent and obsolete . . ."
Sentinel: A proposed ABM system designed to defend cities against ballistic missile attack.
SOFA: Status of Forces Agreement; SOFAs, which establish legal rights and protocols, are negotiated between the United States and each country in which American forces are deployed.
Space race: The superpower competition in space exploration technology that paralleled the Cold War competition in arms developments.
START: Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty.
Titan II Missile: An early U.S. ICBM, now decommissioned.
Trinity Site: Site of the first U.S. atomic bomb test, now listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
Truman Doctrine: Truman pledged in 1947 to defend "free people who are resisting armed subjugation by armed minorities or outside pressures." The policy was aimed at providing economic and military support to those European countries which were fighting Communist takeover at the time, especially Greece and Turkey.
Warsaw Pact: Signed in 1955, it codified the East-West split and provided for mutual defense among Albania, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and the Soviet Union.
|
ABM AEC AFB ALCM ANZUS BMEWS CCAFS CENTO CIA CMH DERP DEW DMZ DoD DoE DUSD-ES EEC FFRDC FOIA FRA GLCM GOCO HABS HAER ICBM ICOMOS INF IRBM JCS MAAG MACOMS MAPs NARA NARL NASA NASM NATO NHPA NLF NPS NRC NSA NSC NST OPNAV OSD PRD SAC SALT SDI SEATO SHPO SLBMs SOFA SSBN START U.N. UNESCO USACERL USAF USAFMP USIA USMC |
Anti-ballistic missile Atomic Energy Commission Air Force Base Air-launched cruise missile Australia, New Zealand, and United States Pact Ballistic missile early warning system Cape Canaveral Air Force Station Central Treaty Organization Central Intelligence Agency Center of Military History Defense Environmental Restoration Program Defense early warning system De-Militarized Zone Department of Defense Department of Energy Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Environmental Security European Economic Community Federally funded research and development Freedom of Information Act Federal Records Act Ground-launched cruise missile Government-owned, contractor-operated Historic American Buildings Survey Historic American Engineering Record Intercontinental ballistic missile International Council on Monuments and Sites Intermediate-range nuclear force Intermediate ballistic missile Joint Chiefs of Staff Military Assistance Advisory Group Major Commands Military Assistance Programs National Archives and Records Administration Naval Arctic Research Laboratory National Aeronautics and Space Administration National Air and Space Museum, Smithsonian Institution North Atlantic Treaty Organization National Historic Preservation Act National Liberation Front of South Vietnam National Park Service Nuclear Regulatory Commission National Security Agency National Security Council Nuclear and Space Talks Office of the Chief of Naval Operations Office of the Secretary of Defense Presidential Review Directive Strategic Air Command Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty Strategic Defense Initiative, Star Wars Southeast Asia Treaty Organization State Historic Preservation Officer Submarine-launched ballistic missiles Status of Forces Agreement Nuclear-powered fleet ballistic missile submarine Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty United Nations United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization United States Army Construction and Engineering Research Laboratories United States Air Force United States Air Force Museum Program United States Information Agency United States Marine Corps |
Coming in from the Cold
Military Heritage in the Cold War
June 1994
| This document was prepared for the Legacy Program. It does not necessarily reflect the policy or practices of the Department of Defense. |