740.5/9–2550
Memorandum of Conversation, by the Acting Secretary of
State
top secret
[Washington,] September 25, 1950.
Appointment of a Supreme Commander
I showed the President the pertinent part of the attached memorandum and
he immediately indicated that he understood the value of having a
commander designated prior to the actual commitment of forces in order
that he could be in a position to spur the European countries on in
getting the work done incident to the preparation of forces to be
committed. He is agreeable to the position last suggested by Defense,
but does feel that we need quite firm “assurance.” The
[Page 345]
President also feels that the kind of man
he would wish to designate as Supreme Commander would hardly wish to
accept such a designation until he is quite sure forces will be brought
into being and committed, and that he will, therefore, have a command
over which to exercise his authority.
The President indicated that as soon as we have the necessary assurances
and commitments “on the line,” he will have a Supreme Commander for
us.
[Enclosure]
Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State for
European Affairs (Perkins) to the Under
Secretary of State (Webb)
[Washington,] September 25,
1950.
Subject: Appointment of a Supreme Commander
The joint letter from State and Defense to the President on the
creation of a European Force contained the following sentence (3rd
paragraph in answer 6) on the appointment of a Supreme Commander:
“We recommend that an American national be appointed now as
Chief of Staff and eventually as a Supreme Commander for the
European defense force but only upon the request of the
European nations and upon their assurance that they will
provide sufficient forces, including adequate German units,
to constitute a command reasonably capable of fulfilling its
responsibilities.”
In preparing the Resolution for the Council meeting tomorrow1 the Deputies have
submitted the following:
“The Supreme Commander will be appointed as soon as
sufficient national forces in being have been committed to
the integrated Force to enable the latter to be reasonably
capable of fulfilling its responsibilities.”
When this was shown to Defense they suggested the following wording:
“The Supreme Commander shall be appointed as soon as there is
assurance that sufficient forces will be provided to the
integrated Force to enable the latter to be reasonably
capable of fulfilling its responsibilities.”
The significance of the change is that in the latter version it would
permit the appointment of a Supreme Commander before the European
Force had actually been organized. The State Department has been
[Page 346]
in favor of this position,
but Defense insisted on the insertion2 of the word “eventually” which meant
that although a Chief of Staff could be appointed under
assurances[,] the Commander himself will not be until Forces in
being were committed to the integrated Force.
The latter version appears preferable in that it permits more
flexibility. It is also believed that it provides adequate
protection. In obtaining assurances we could ask for firm
commitments and specific timetables.
We do not know whether Secretary Marshall has personally approved
this change or not. We do not propose to advance it without his
agreement.
