◆ SpookStack

Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R000100330001-5 SPECIAL EDITION -- TERRORISM -- 26 JUNE 1984 WALL STREET JOURNAL 12 June 1984 Pg. U.S. to Fortify Persian Gulf Embassies U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT 18 June 1984 (12) Pg. 16 One reason U.S. officials are reluctant to send more Stinger antiaircraft mis- siles to Persian Gulf nations threat- ened by the Iran-Iraq War: They fear security 15 so lax in some areas that the sophisticated weapons may fall into the hands of terrorists who would use them to shoor down civilian airliners. By Epvarpo LACHICA Staff Reporter of Tae: WALL STREET JOURNAI WASHINGTON — The State Department is asking the Office of Management and Budget for $165 million over the next two fiscal years to redesign or build anew six or seven embassies in the Persian Gulf, where U.S. diplomats are exposed to maxi- mum terrorist danger. The new security program began even before the latest tensions in the gulf from the Iran-Iraq war. In December 1983, the U.S.-Embassy in Kuwait was wrecked by a terrorist who drove a dynamite-laden truck through the gates, killing three Kuwaiti employees and injuring 35 other persons. Around the world, the department has counted 45 separate acts of violence against its facilities and personne! since January. Urgently needed security measures have turned some of the remaining gulf missions into veritable fortresses, The one in Abu Dhabi looks like something out of “Beau Geste,’’ with armed sentries in parapets. Pillboxes guard the wall corners. ‘“Dragon’s teeth,’ or concrete barriers, keep motor traffic a safe distance away. But this siege setting isn't how the U.S. government likes its overseas missions to look. ‘‘Ideally, our embassies should physi- cally express the openness of American so- ciety,’ says Robert Lamb, assistant secre- tary of state for administration. ‘‘We can't conduct our business hiding behind sand- bags and concertina wire. I'd hate to see us go the way of the Russians who build their embassies to keep their people in and other people out.” The department is inviting U.S. archi- tects to submit designs that can accom- plish the twin objectives of keeping its dip- lomats safe while maintaining certain aes- thetic standards that the U.S. has set for its official buildings overseas. Some architects, though, wonder whether this is possible. ‘‘The two aims are terribly irreconcilable. You can’t have it both ways,” says Edward Bassett, a se- nior partner of Skidmore, Owings & Mer- rill. The architectura) profession is digging deep into its bag of design tricks but there's almost no stopping the trend to- wards ‘‘building bunkers,’’ he says. Mr. Bassett, who has been advising the U.S. government on building design since 1947, says it’s almost impossible to protect consulates that draw hundreds of visa seekers every day. What makes the prob- lem more challenging is the extent of the threat. ‘‘Even our diplomats in friendly countries aren't safe anymore,"’ he adds. “With all the insanity afoot in the world, architects are resigned to building castles again,”” he says. But even if he were to build a strongbox surrounded by 20-foot wails, that still couldn't protect against ‘‘a nut carrying a bomb in a sec- ond-hand Cessna.” Some ideas that have been passed on to Mr. Lamb's office, however, could improve the security of embassies while retaining an illusion of openness. These include: —Consiructing the buildings on ground higher than street level if climate and the need for public access require an open lay- out. The higher elevation could prevent truck-bombers from crashing into the walls. —Raising grassy mounds around the buildings to provide similar protection while giving the grounds a neat landscaped look. —Planting shade trees with dense fo- liage to block the view of important offices from the street. —Fencing the property with iron grill- work and firethorn shrubs. The layout is Yecorative but the thorny bush and the high fence could slow down an intruder long enough for security personnel to re- act, The State Department is also experi- menting with new ballistics-proof building material and high-technology surveillance. Much of this work is still secret. Stuart Knoop, a vice president of Qu- dens & Knoop Architects, notes that de- signers are increasingly attuned to secu- rity needs. ‘We've a rich market in the corporate world,’’ he confides. “Some buildings designed for the oil and auto in- dastries are made to keep out industrial spies.” Mr. Knoop is advising the State Depart- ment on finding new embassy sites. For reasons of economy and convenience, the department uses many rented properties overseas. But the security threat is giving the department a new incentive to acquire its own sites and build on them. The Beirut Embassy that was blown up in Apri} 1983 with the loss of 47 lives was ill-suited for security. It was originally an apartment building. Little can be done about the historic buildings that U.S. diplomats occupy in London, Paris and Ottawa. ‘‘They are just too valuable to be ripped apart and re- built,” Mr, Knoop says. Mr. Lamb says the department can't af- ford to relax. “‘The kind of threat keeps changing,’' he explains. In the late 1960s, terrorists targeted ambassadors and other principa! officers. The Foreign Service re- acted by armoring ambassadors’ cars and providing them with bodyguards. In the early 1970s, America’s enemies switched tactics and started mailing letter bombs to embassies. That threat was curbed, but later in the decade mob violence became the major threat. U.S. missions in Tripoli, Islamabad and Tehran were overrun and legally occupied. U.S. embassies now are easier to defend against mob attack. Some 1,200 Marines help guard overseas missions, and the de- partment is negotiating with the corps to augment this force. To prevent the capture of diplomatic secrets, paper files are being converted to computer memories that can be easily destroyed in the event of an em- bassy seizure. But with the early 1980s came the truck- bombing threat. The Beirut and Kuwait embassies were the major casualties. “We can counter each threat as it emerges but we can't tell what our ene- mies will think of next,” Mr. Lamb ad- mits. Security doesn’t come cheap. ‘We're al- ready spending nearly 12% of our entire administrative budget for security,’ Mr. Lamb says. The department already is au- thorized to spend $175 million for that pur- pose for the next fiscal year starting Oct. 1. That's 25% more than similar provisions for the current year, Mr. Lamb adds. Approved For Release 2000/08/07 : CIA-RDP96-00788R000100330001-5