S/S Files: NSC 48 Series

Memorandum by the Director of the Policy Planning Staff (Nitze) to the Secretary of State

top secret

Subject: Item 2, NSC Meeting, May 2—NSC 48/3,1 United States Objectives, Policies and Courses of Action in Asia.

This paper is scheduled for preliminary discussion, but not final action. The paper as it stands is generally acceptable to us, although we have in mind proposing some drafting refinements. General Marshall and the other members of the Council may be prepared to approve the paper in principle today. Unless the President is strongly of a contrary opinion, I recommend that you take the position that the paper should be returned to the Senior Staff for further refinements. Final action can then be taken by the Council at its next meeting, if it is felt necessary for the Council to approve these changes.

The JCS has submitted its comments (Tab A).2 With respect to the JCS revision of 9 b (2), you may wish to observe that their language appears to narrow the concept of our military mission in Korea and request General Bradley’s clarification. You may also wish to make similar inquiries regarding the proposed changes of 11 a and 11 c.

Paragraph 3 of the JCS paper is the most important point in their comments. It raises the question of the adequacy of our political policy as a basis for their military policy in Korea. This is, in substance, one of MacArthur’s principal contentions. I think you will wish to seek particular clarification on this point.

[Page 401]

These proposed revisions by the JCS are adequate reasons for returning the paper for consideration by the Senior Staff.

If necessary you can say that revisions by this Department in the wording of the current draft are being submitted directly to the Senior Staff for their consideration.3

  1. Not printed. See footnote 3, p. 388.
  2. See the memorandum from the Joint Chiefs of Staff to Secretary Marshall, April 30, p. 387.
  3. In the light of discussion at its 90th meeting on May 2, 1951, the National Security Council decided to refer NSC 48/3 to the NSC Staff for revision (NSC Action No. 466–b).