Policy Planning Staff Files

Memorandum by the Director of the Policy Planning Staff (Kennan)1

top secret

Attached is a paper designed to suggest the sort of program we feel might be put in hand to create a new and hopeful atmosphere in our East and South Asian policy.

Since the schedule embodied in this paper is only intended to be illustrative, and does not represent any final Staff recommendation, I am not making it a Staff paper. But I hope it will serve to show what we have in mind as the sort of program we consider possible and necessary, without committing us to certain of the individual proposals (such as that for a three-power defense treaty) which obviously require careful study and airing before they could be seriously considered.

George F. Kennan
[Page 1148]
[Annex]

Paper Drafted by Mr. John P. Davies, Jr., of the Policy Planning Staff

top secret

Suggested Course of Action in East and South Asia

1. It is apparent that in the American public mind our policy toward Asia is suffering from an acute case of negativism. That the objective situation in East and South Asia does not permit a wide range of solid action on our part is not adequately understood and, even if it were, would not satisfy the demand in the American nature for “positive action”. The White Paper on China2 may do much to provide a rational explanation for our policy of disengagement in China. We have little to be ashamed of in that record and much of which to be proud. While the White Paper will go far toward justifying our policy toward China and quiet most of our critics, it will also probably provide some fuel for the more extreme partisan critics of our policy in the Far East. Furthermore, the issuance of that paper will be, essentially, another negative act. The public may say, “Very well, you were right in not doing anything, but where do we go from here?”

2. A change of climate is needed in our policy toward East and South Asia. It is needed not only to win the confidence and support of the American public. It is needed also to improve the psychological atmosphere in East and South Asia, an atmosphere which is becoming surcharged with nervous apprehension.

3. The course of action presented below is directed at bringing about this necessary change in political climate. It is designed to achieve, so far as is possible, certain tangible objectives. But because there is so little that we can do in a concrete way in East and South Asia, the true measure of our success will not be in what we do but how we do it. The political climate in East and South: Asia is going to be noticeably improved only if we undertake the following actions with a real sense of theater. In this oriental setting, the gesture and the show are as important as the substantial deed.

4. The following proposed actions are cast in the form of a detailed timetable. This has been done in an attempt, not to lay down a hard and fast operational schedule, but to emphasize the necessity of comprehensive and closely-timed actions on a wide front if we are to create a new and hopeful atmosphere in our East and South Asian policy. The following suggestions are therefore subject to modification both in timing and in substance.

[Page 1149]

July 1949

5. We should immediately:

(a)
discuss frankly with and seek the approval of key Congressional leaders for the course of action set forth below, telling them that in our opinion no lesser program is likely to be effective in containing Communism in East and South Asia;
(b)
discuss this paper frankly with the British and Canadian Governments;
(c)
continue the implementation of the recommendations contained in the Policy Planning Staff’s paper on Southeast Asia.

6. President Quirino should be invited to visit Washington for conversations regarding mutual American-Philippine interests in the Far East. This invitation and the reason for it should be publicly announced.

7. If in our present examination of the Japanese problem we find that we can, within three or four months, move toward a peace settlement with that country without jeopardizing our essential security interests, we should do so. And as we do so, we should prepare the American public for the forthcoming changes, including those mentioned in paragraph 22. At the same time, we should, through diplomatic means, thoroughly prepare the ground with friendly FEC Governments.

8. We should continue and intensify preparations for the extension of economic and military assistance to Indonesia in expectation of a possible success in the political negotiations now taking place between the Dutch and the Indonesians.

9. We should continue our efforts to strengthen the Thai Government by (1) expediting the transfer to Thailand of the gold at Tokyo claimed by the Thai Government; (2) organizing technical missions to assist the Thai Government in its agricultural and industrial reconstruction programs; (3) granting promptly a small amount of military aid as an emergency measure and taking whatever steps as may be necessary to facilitate future Thai procurement of military equipment in this country; and (4) instituting periodic naval visits with naval aircraft making good will flights into the interior of Thailand.

10. The President should one day prior to the issuance of the White Paper on China make a speech in which he points up the main conclusions to be drawn from the White Paper and sets forth in broad, affirmative, confident tones the future course of our policy with respect not only to China but also to East and South Asia.

11. Release of the White Paper.

12. Ambassador Jessup should start on a tour of the area, visiting Manila, Bangkok, Singapore, Batavia, Rangoon, New Delhi, Colombo and Karachi for talks with Government leaders at these capitals, regarding major issues of mutual interest.

[Page 1150]

13. If Quirino can visit Washington, his stay here should be attended by wide publicity concluding with a joint communiqué announcing close U.S.-Philippine collaboration in the Far East. We should give Quirino:

(a)
Some greater degree of assurance than is now manifest of American support of the Philippines against possible external attack. What is necessary is simply that we affirm to a greater degree than we have heretofore the existing U.S. willingness to go to the aid of the Philippines if they are subjected to external attack.
(b)
A U.S.–Philippine Defense Board and a mutually satisfactory solution of the base problem. Political considerations here should override any technical objections of the NME.
(c)
Executive support of additional funds to be appropriated to the War Damage Commission or similar economic aid.

14. Announce preparations for the establishment at Manila of a regional university in which the various independent governments of East and South Asia and the U.S. collaborate in training native technicians for the development of their individual countries in a spirit of mutual cooperation. Our contribution should be on the basis of the President’s Point Four program. While the attraction that such an institution would exert throughout the region would be largely technical, it should be our purpose that the university have a political significance through developing a consciousness of interdependence within East and South Asia and that area’s interdependence with the Atlantic Community. In a subtle but perhaps no less effective way, this institution, and any future branches of it in the region, should be our counter-part, in our own terms, to Moscow’s University of the Toilers of the East.

August 1949

15. The Chiefs of Mission at Delhi and Karachi should follow up systematically with the governments to which they are accredited topics of mutual interest raised by Ambassador Jessup on his visit.

16. Provided that Congressional leaders and the National Security Council favor such a security arrangement, we should sound out the Philippines and Australia on the desirability of a Three Power Defense Treaty, along the general lines of the Atlantic Pact, composed initially of the U.S., the Philippines and Australia, Eventually, this pact should embrace these three countries plus Canada, Japan and possibly New Zealand.

17. If Australia and the Philippines are willing to go along with us, we should begin conversations, looking toward the creation of such a defensive arrangement and make public announcement of that fact.

18. Provided that we have come to a conclusion that we can move toward a peace settlement with Japan without greater risk to our security than now exists, provided that a majority of the FEC countries [Page 1151] have indicated acceptance of our minimum desiderata, and provided that we have firm reason to believe that the Japanese Government and people would welcome an invitation to join the three-power treaty, we should propose the convocation of a peace conference composed of the FEC powers using the FEC voting procedure. If our proposal is not accepted by all of the FEC powers or if a draft is not agreed upon, we should promptly move to draft a treaty of our own and obtain the concurrence of whatever powers wish to participate or, if none do, on a basis of direct negotiation between the U.S. and Japan.

19. If we decide that American bases should be retained in Japan, we should have, in addition to assurances of Japan’s desire to adhere to the three-power treaty, a clear understanding that Japan will, as its contribution to the treaty obligations, invite the U.S. to establish the bases which we seek.

September 1949

20. Conclusion of a U.S.–Philippine–Australian Defense Treaty.

October 1949

21. If the conditions enumerated above have been met, we should convoke a Japanese Peace Conference.

22. The signing of a peace treaty with Japan should be immediately followed by an invitation to Japan, Canada and possibly New Zealand to adhere to the three-power treaty.

23. Visit by Nehru. We should seize this occasion to dramatize friendly and close relations between the U.S. and India and our recognition of the important and constructive role which India can play in a solution of East and South Asian problems.

  1. Submitted to the Under Secretary of State (Webb), Ambassador at Large Philip C. Jessup, Counselor Charles E. Bohlen, and the Deputy Under Secretary of State (Rusk).
  2. Department of State, United States Relations With China, With Special Reference to the Period 1944–1949 (Washington, Government Printing Office, 1949).