Chiefs of Staff Committee: Minutes of Meeting p.323

DEFE 4/65 1953 Oct 20
4

TOP SECRET

Islands, Sweden and subsequently Norway and that amphibious attacks would be
launched from a number of naval bases and other ports in the Baltic. We there fore consider that destruction of the invasion forces seen concentrating at their
embarkation ports must be included in our study.

7. Furthermore, we believe that the Russians will correctly appreciate the
extent of the atomic threat to their fleet and submarine bases, and that they will
make every effort to work from dispersed areas and depot ships from the start of
a war. We have therefore also considered attack upon fleet units, submarines and
depot ships dispersed from their bases.

Limitations of Certain Methods of Attack
Attack by Carrier-borne Aircraft

8. We know that some United States carriers will carry atom bombs. Certain
inland targets are within range of United States carrier-borne aircraft. Under
operational conditions, however, we doubt whether their navigation and radar
equipment are adequate for pinpoint targets far inland.

Attack by Naval Forces other than Carrier Forces

9. Against certain targets, surface bombardment, underwater sneak attack
and amphibious raids could achieve considerable results, but they would be limited
by the absence of anything better than the conventional weapons available to them
in 1954. They have not been included as recommended forms of attack in this
paper as their success depends on the availability of detailed intelligence such as
is unlikely to be available in the first month of war.

Attacks by Clandestine and Special Air Service Forces

10. With the weapons likely to be available, clandestine and Special Air
Service forces would suffer from the same limitations. None of the targets could be
attacked by clandestine forces with any reasonable chance of success, and the only
types of target which are suitable for attack by Special Air Service forces are air craft on the ground and canal locks. But the locks of the Baltic-White Sea Canal
cannot be attacked by these means owing to the limited amount of darkness during
the ice free months, and we have therefore recommended the use of Special Air
Service forces as a possible method of attack against only one target system-aircraft
on the ground.

11. It is essential to stress, however, that such operations could not
be certain of achieving worthwhile results, and the recovery of the troops involved
would call for a considerable effort, and probably rarely be achieved. We therefore
think that Special Air Service forces should be used for this purpose only as a
last resort.

Priorities
12. In assessing priorities for attack, three assumptions have been made: -
(a) that the Kiel Canal and the Trave-Elbe Canal would be temporarily

blocked by orthodox demolition or by other methods;
(b) that the majority of the large submarines would be based initially on

northern ports and would be at sea on D day;
(c) that the Russians would have attempted to disperse from their bases such

submarines and surface ships as were not at sea on operations.
13. In the light of these assumptions, we have grouped targets in the following
priorities but have not attempted to give an order of importance within each
group.

(a) First Priority

(i) Destruction of Baltic bases for surface forces and submarines;
(ii) Destruction of any amphibious forces seen to be concentrating in

Baltic ports;
(iii) Mining of the Sound and the Belts and of the Kattegat and (if

prior demolition has failed) the western approaches to the Kiel
Canal;

TOP SECRET