In March 1962, the Joint Chiefs of Staff submitted proposed provocations that could justify U.S. military intervention in Cuba. Suggestions included a ship explosion blamed on Cuba, fabricated attacks around Guantanamo, and destruction of an unmanned substitute aircraft made to resemble a civilian airliner.
The memorandum is authentic, and the proposals are explicit. It was a preliminary planning submission, not an account of attacks that happened. Its later release exposed how senior military planners considered manufacturing a public case for war. Northwoods was not executed and does not prove unrelated later attacks were staged.
Read the memorandum as a planning document. Its language moves from a desired political outcome to fabricated events that could supply the justification. That reversal is the historical shock: the public explanation would have been manufactured to support an action already being contemplated.
An authentic proposal is strong evidence about its authors’ willingness to consider deception. Execution requires a different trail: authorisations, operational records, participants and corroboration. Keeping those questions separate makes the actual document more useful than treating it as a universal explanation for later events.
The established record.
- 01
The Joint Chiefs submitted the memorandum on 13 March 1962.
- 02
Proposed incidents would be blamed on Cuba to justify intervention.
- 03
The document describes a preliminary planning submission.
How the story unfolded.
- 13 March 1962
The memorandum is submitted
Joint Chiefs planning proposes pretexts for intervention in Cuba.
- 1962
The proposal remains a proposal
The Northwoods scenario is not carried out.
- Later declassification
The plan becomes inspectable
Released records allow the proposed incidents to be read directly.
Where the evidence stops.
The proposal was not executed. Its existence does not establish that unrelated attacks were staged.
Read the original sources.
The source may establish a narrower point than the headline. Follow the specific finding, its date and its limitations.
What does a genuine plan prove about intent, and what would prove execution?