SWNCC Files
Memorandum by the Joint Chiefs of
Staff to the State–War–Navy Coordinating
Committee
top secret
SWNCC 285
[Washington,] April 11, 1946.
Withdrawal of U.S. Forces
From Bases on the Territory of Foreign Nation73
the problem
1. To determine the action that is required by the Joint Chiefs of Staff at
this time on the question of withdrawal of U.S. troops from overseas bases
on the territory of foreign nations.
facts bearing on the problem
2. See Appendix “B”,74
page 8.
conclusions
3. There are military considerations which make inadvisable the withdrawal of
U.S. forces from overseas bases on the territory of [Page 1172] foreign nations in every instance in strict
accordance with the “time limitation” provisions of the existing agreement
with the foreign government concerned.
4. Since the State Department is the agency of the U.S. Government
responsible, for negotiations with foreign governments and, correspondingly,
for U.S. policies in respect to these governments, the policy to be followed
in the withdrawal of U.S. forces from the territory of foreign nations must
be decided on a governmental level after due consideration of all aspects,
including the military.
5. Accordingly, the Joint Chiefs of Staff should inform the Secretaries of
State, War and the Navy of the military considerations concerning this
matter, emphasizing the effects on the future security of the United States,
and should request advice as to the governmental policy to be followed in
the withdrawal of U.S. forces from overseas bases on the territory of
foreign nations.
recommendation
6. That the Joint Chiefs of Staff forward this study to the State-War-Navy
Coordinating Committee, recommending that the memorandum in Appendix “A”,
page 3, be forwarded to the Secretary of State.
Appendix “A”
Draft
Memorandum To Be Forwarded by the State–War–Navy
Coordinating Committee to the Secretary of State
United States military forces are presently stationed on the territory of
foreign nations (other than continental Europe, Korea, China, Japan and
the Japanese Mandated Islands) pursuant to agreements made during the
war. In most cases, these agreements include provisions for withdrawal
of U.S. forces ranging from “immediately on conclusion of hostilities”
as for Surinam, Aruba and Curacao (Netherlands) to “one year after date
of peace treaty” as for Panama.
While the United States Government has not established or recognized,
either domestically or internationally, the date for the “cessation of
hostilities”, “the end of the war”, “the conclusion of the peace”, or
any of the other terms used in the wartime agreements mentioned above,
it has become evident that many of the foreign nations upon whose soil
U.S. troops are stationed consider the date of the end of the war to be
2 September 1945. For example, in the case of the Azores, which is an
“Essential” base area and is required to support occupation forces, it
is understood that the Portuguese Government considers 2 September 1945
as the end of hostilities with Japan and expects the United States to
withdraw forces from, and turn over facilities in, [Page 1173] the Azores to the Portuguese within nine
months, or by 2 June 1946.
The Joint Chiefs of Staff recognize the moral obligations of the United
States to abide by these agreements. Action has been, and is being,
taken by both the Army and the Navy to withdraw from a large number of
bases on foreign soil where there is no further military necessity for
the maintenance of U.S. forces. The Joint Chiefs of Staff point out the
military aspects of the retention of U.S. forces at various locations on
the territory of foreign nations as follows:
-
a.
- The United States is obligated to enforce the surrenders of
Germany and Japan. Hence, the United States must continue to
maintain occupational forces in Germany and Japan for a
presently unpredictable period of time. The retention by the
United States of certain intermediate air bases and ports, with
their supporting and ancillary facilities on the lines of
communication to Germany and Japan, is essential to the
administration, supply, and support of U.S. occupational forces.
The Joint Chiefs of Staff therefore consider that the
maintenance of U.S. forces at these intermediary points (as
listed in the Annex hereto) is a military necessity until the
strength and disposition of occupational forces are such as to
permit adjustments.
-
b.
- At certain of the locations indicated in the Annex, there is a
requirement for long-term U.S. base rights. The Joint Chiefs of
Staff refer to their view, expressed in …(SWNCC 38/25),75 that the comprehensive base system
which will result from obtaining the desired rights is an
essential requirement for United States security in the event of
a failure of the United Nations to preserve world peace;
furthermore, the provision of this system of bases will enable
the United States to contribute more effectively to that
organization in maintaining peace throughout the world. A total
withdrawal of U.S. forces from bases now occupied and listed as
“Essential” and from certain of those listed as “Required” would
tend to weaken the security of the United States. In addition to
the security aspects mentioned above, not only would it be
difficult to withdraw forces from these “Essential” and
“Required” bases and later replace them pursuant to a new
agreement, but also such a procedure would be unnecessarily
costly.
-
c.
- The Joint Chiefs of Staff have recommended to the State
Department that negotiations be conducted for long-term U.S.
military rights of air transit and technical stop for military
aircraft at places set forth in… (SWNCC 38/30).76 The Joint Chiefs of Staff consider
that, from a military standpoint, U.S. personnel should be
maintained at these places, including those responsible for
weather reporting, aids to navigation, and communication
facilities necessary for the operation of these air routes,
until such time as the local governments or commercial interests
are prepared to assume maintenance and operation of the
essential airport and air route facilities.
It is to the advantage of the War and Navy Departments to close out as
expeditiously as possible those bases and facilities for which no
peacetime garrison is presently planned, or which are not necessary in
connection with occupational responsibilities.
[Page 1174]
The Annex77 hereto
contains a list of locations (other than occupational areas and China)
at which U.S. troops are currently stationed, and at which there is a
requirement either for long-term U.S. base or transit rights, or for
purposes incident to occupation. Also indicated thereon are the reasons
for continuing to maintain U.S. troops at these bases.
The Joint Chiefs of Staff recommend:
-
a.
- That prior to the date for withdrawal mentioned in the present
agreements, the Secretary of State complete, where practicable,
negotiations for long-term rights at those locations listed in
the Annex where there is a requirement for such rights.
-
b.
- That where long-term rights cannot be negotiated prior to the
expiration of present agreements, the Secretary of State
conclude interim arrangements for U.S. forces to remain at those
locations which are required to support occupational forces, or
where the continued presence of U.S. troops is necessary to
further negotiations for long-term military rights.
-
c.
- That, where no long-term rights are indicated, but where there
is a need to support occupational forces, the Secretary of State
conclude short-term arrangements for the maintenance of U.S.
troops at these locations.
-
d.
- That the Secretary of State furnish to the Secretaries of War
and the Navy a list of those locations at which there is a
requirement indicated in columns 4 and 5 of the Annex where U.S.
forces may be withdrawn at any time without adversely affecting
the negotiations for long-term rights.
