Foreign Relations of the United States, 1949, National Security Affairs, Foreign Economic Policy, Volume I

840.20/8–649

Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State for Congressional Relations (Gross) to the Secretary of State

confidential

[Washington,] August 6, 1949.

Subject: Strategy on Military Assistance Program

Redrafting the MAP bill¹ has for all practical purposes reduced our problem to one of amount. The concentrated fire of the opposition will now be directed toward reducing the authorization amount. Their technique will be to urge the Administration to “cut the program down so as to make it an interim program.” Under heavy pressure from Taft,² Wherry,³ and other Republican policy leaders, Vandenberg and Dulles will find it difficult to back down from their publicly announced position in this regard, even if they should become persuaded to do so by the factual presentation which is yet to come.

Illustrative of the problem we will face is the talk I had today with Cabot Lodge, who is one of the best friends of the MAP on the Hill. Lodge had just seen Berkner⁴ and Lemnitzer and had received from them information concerning the details of the Program. Lodge had also gotten into a discussion with them about the amount of the Program and, I gather from Berkner’s report of the conversation, he understood Lodge to suggest that we might get a RFC advance of something close to a billion dollars. This sounded so good that I thought it desirable to follow it up immediately by discussing details with Lodge.

However, I found Lodge quite confused on this subject. What he was clear on was that “we should give very serious consideration to reducing the amount.” I asked him whether he meant the amount of the authorization or of the appropriation, and he replied he meant both. He said that Senator Taft and others who were really against the Program were going to make much of the argument that we should wait until the Atlantic Pact Council has been organized and has made recommendations and that, in view of what Vandenberg and Dulles had already said publicly, it would be difficult for them to change their position. He asked whether we could not limit our request to an amount sufficient to cover an “interim program until April 1,” then come up in January for the balance. I told him of the rate of expenditure projected under the Program as it is now drawn up and he said he recognized that this would, of course, make it difficult to follow his suggestion.

I told Lodge that it was your view, which you had expressed to Vandenberg, that the amount depended upon the nature of the Program and that until this had been explored, it was impossible for anyone not familiar with the Program to make up his mind about the proper amount. Lodge agreed. I also asked Lodge what he had in mind about the possibilities of an RFC advance. He said he did not know very much about this but thought it would be very difficult to get a substantial advance unless it were cleared with the Appropriations Committee. He suggested that we elicit the support of members of the Joint Committee⁵ who are also members of the Appropriations Committee. (These are Senators Russell,⁶ Bridges,⁷ Gurney,⁸ and Saltonstall.⁹) I shall follow this up at an appropriate time.

I think it very important that the Joint Chiefs of Staff be in the forefront in the “Battle of the Amount.” This should be handled essentially as a logistical presentation. Those who favor cutting the amount should be brought into head-on clash with actual logistical planning so that they are in the position of having to take responsibility for either reducing the amount of the armed force of Europe which is to be reactivated or for slowing down its rate of activation. The FACC and the military spokesmen on the Hill should have in mind at all times that it is imperative that a “climate of disclosure” be created and maintained on this subject.¹⁰

1. In response to Congressional objections to H.R. 5748, the bill originating with the President’s message of July 25, the Executive Branch redrafted the legislation. The revised version, H.R. 5895, was introduced on August 5. This legislation authorized the expenditure of $1,400,000,000 in military assistance and made aid to Western European nations contingent upon the creation of a unified defense command. The Foreign Affairs Committee reported H.R. 5895 on August 15; for the text of H.R. 5895 and information regarding the proceedings of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, see The Mutual Defense Assistance Act of 1949: Hearings Before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, pp. 227 ff. and House Report No. 1265, Part 2, Supplemental Report of the House Foreign Affairs Committee on the Mutual Defense Assistance Act of 1949 (Washington, Government Printing Office, 1949). For the statement made by Secretary Acheson before the Committee on July 28, see the Department of State Bulletin, August 8. 1949, pp. 189–194. See also Military Assistance Program, 1949: Hearings Held in Executive Session before the Committee on Foreign Relations and the Committee on Armed Services, United States Senate (81st Cong., 1st sess.).
2. Senator Robert A. Taft of Ohio.
3. Senator Kenneth S. Wherry of Nebraska.
4. Lloyd V. Berkner, Special Assistant to the Secretary of State; Coordinator for Foreign Military Assistance Programs (S/CFA). Berkner, Acting Director of the Department of Terrestrial Magnetism of the Carnegie Institution since 1948 and occupant of various positions in the United States Government during the period 1927–1947, became Special Assistant with the creation of the post on April 6, 1949. With Berkner’s appointment, the position of Coordinator for Foreign Assistance Programs (U/CFA) was discontinued. Gross thereafter devoted full time to his duties as Assistant Secretary of State for Congressional Relations. Berkner succeeded Gross as Chairman of the Foreign Assistance Correlation Committee.
5. On July 28, legislation respecting the Military Assistance Program had been referred to a Committee consisting of the joint membership of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and the Senate Armed Services Committee.
6. Senator Richard B. Russell of Georgia.
7. Senator Styles Bridges of New Hampshire.
8. Senator Chan Gurney of South Dakota.
9. Senator Leverett Saltonstall of Massachusetts.
10. On August 8, the Department of State transmitted a report on military assistance rendered to foreign countries since the Second World War to Representative John Davis Dodge of Connecticut. That report and an exchange of letters between Representative Lodge and Secretary Acheson (July 17 and August 15) are printed in the Department of State Bulletin, September 26, 1949, pp. 476–482.