Center To New York Times: How About An Apology Now That The Pentagon Has Debunked False Claims About Sdi Test?

(Washington, D.C.): Today, Secretary of Defense Les Aspin categorically denied the substance of two New York Times articles and one lead editorial concerning alleged "rigging" of a 1984 experiment conducted by the Strategic Defense Initiative. On each of three key points, the Secretary established that the nation’s journal of record — whose reports about a deceptive Homing Overlay Experiment (HOE) ricocheted among and were amplified by virtually every major media outlet in the country — was dead wrong:

The test was not "rigged." According to Secretary Aspin, the articles authored by Times correspondent Tim Weiner (which appeared on 18 and 27 August 1993, respectively) were in error:

"[The experiment] was not rigged by the inclusion of a radar beacon…on the target or by any other means. The experiment demonstrated what it purported to demonstrate, namely that the final guidance of the interceptor to a direct hit was done by the onboard heat seeker."

No deception program was used on this test to deceive the Soviet Union about the performance of the HOE device. According to Secretary Aspin, an inherent capability to deceive the Soviets was built into this test but was not employed. Such a deception program — which was, not surprisingly, a closely held secret — appears entirely consistent with standard operating procedures employed by both the USSR and the United States to deny Cold War adversaries useful intelligence about weapons systems under development.

The Congress was not deceived about the actual performance of the HOE test. Secretary Aspin reported that information concerning both the presence of radio beacons and the heating of the target reentry vehicle — whose "secret" utilization constituted the central allegations in the first and second Weiner articles — was available to Congress. As the Center for Security Policy noted in connection with the latter article, the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment wrote in 1988 that the HOE tests were "sound experiments, properly designed."⁽¹⁾

Secretary Aspin concluded his press statement by applying the coup de grâce to the New York Times’ vaunted conspiracy theory: "Our conclusion at this point is that no past test results have involved deception programs that could have deceived Congress or the American people."

The Center for Security Policy — which immediately disputed the first Weiner article as being unfounded, misleading and outrageous and correctly anticipated and rebutted the arguments made in the second article prior to its publication — believes that there is no longer any excuse for the Times to refuse to issue a formal retraction of its error-filled reports and an apology to those officials, like former Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger, whose credibility and integrity were impugned in the process.

Should the New York Times continue to do so, however, it should be clear to all observers that it has become a vehicle for advocacy journalism, if not outright propaganda. Such conduct is unworthy of a newspaper with the Times’ largely distinguished record and vaunted reputation.

The Center also reiterates its call for Mr. Weiner’s dismissal in light of this appalling example of shoddy journalism. More importantly, it suggests that anyone inclined to make use in the future of the Weiner allegations — particularly in congressional debate — will, by so doing, establish unmistakably his or her ignorance in the field.

– 30 –

1. See the Center’s Decision Brief entitled, ‘Paper Trail’ Confirms New York Times’ Agenda, Sloppy Reporting on Recent SDI ‘Conspiracy’ Allegations, (No. 93-D71, 26 August 1993) which elaborated upon arguments made in response to the initial Times’ story — All the ‘News’ that Fits the Times’ Political Agenda: Latest Assault on SDI Unfounded, Indefensible, (No. 93-D70, 18 August 1993).