Office of the Historian

Policy Planning Staff Files

Memorandum of Conversation, by the Executive Secretary of the National Security Council (Lay)

top secret
Washington, May 2, 1950.

  • Memorandum for:1 Mr. Nitze
  • General Burns
  • General Bradley
  • Mr. Lanphier2
  • Mr. Haas3
  • Mr. Bissell4
  • Mr. Schaub5
  • Mr. Dearborn6
  • Mr. Murphy7
  • Mr. Montague8
  • Mr. Voorhees9

Subject: First Meeting of the Ad Hoc Committee on NSC 68

The Executive Secretary opened the meeting with the suggestion that the forthcoming discussion follow generally along the lines of his memorandum to the Ad Hoc Committee of April 28, 1950. This being generally agreed, the first item of discussion was the question of timing and the possibility that some departments would seek additional appropriations for their programs at the current session of Congress. From this discussion, it emerged that State at least was [Page 298] likely to seek such additional appropriations. However, it was felt that requests for such additional appropriations should not be delayed by the programming for NSC 68 as a whole over the longer period.

Doubts were expressed over the possibility of meeting the target date of August 1, particularly on the program for the military build-up. It was widely felt, however, that delay in the formulation of the military program would make it difficult or impossible for the other programs to be formulated promptly and realistically. It was the consensus that every effort should be made to have rough general plans and estimates ready before August 1, 1950, in view of the Committee’s responsibility for responding to the President’s directive.

Discussion then shifted to the second point of the Executive Secretary’s memorandum of April 28, viz., the implications of the conclusions of NSC 68. It was emphasized that the problem of achieving a balance between the fiscal, economic, domestic, political and security implications of NSC 68 was of the greatest importance. Moreover, it was pointed out that the President might desire to state publicly his position on the policies envisaged in NSC 68 early in June.

The Committee then discussed the third point; the suggested list of programs and the assignment of responsibility among the several departments and agencies.

After further discussion it was agreed that:

(1)
Each agency commence urgently its programming on the basis of a rough five-year projection; and
(2)
The Ad Hoc Committee in the meantime explore more fully the reasoning and the implications of NSC 68.

The meeting adjourned at 4:15 p. m.

James S. Lay, Jr.
  1. The individuals listed below participated in the meeting.↩
  2. Thomas G. Lanphier, Jr., Special Assistant to the Chairman of the National Security Resources Board.↩
  3. George C. Haas, Director of the Technical Staff, Treasury Department.↩
  4. Richard M. Bissell, Jr., Assistant Administrator for Program, Economic Cooperation Administration.↩
  5. William F. Schaub, Deputy Chief of the Division of Estimates, Bureau of the Budget.↩
  6. Hamilton Q. Dearborn, representative of the Council of Economic Advisers.↩
  7. Charles S. Murphy, Special Counsel to the President.↩
  8. Representative of the Central Intelligence Agency.↩
  9. Tracy S. Voorhees, Under Secretary of the Army.↩