S/S–NSC files, lot 66 D 148, “Misc. NSC Memos”
Memorandum by the Counselor (Bohlen) to the Secretary of State
Mr. Secretary: The only item for consideration by the NSC, Wednesday, September 24 is Item 2 “Reappraisal of United States Objectives and Strategy for National Security”, NSC 135/2, which is before the Council for final approval.1 You will recall that at the last Council session, Secretary Lovett desired several changes and additions to be made in this paper.2 At a Senior Staff meeting, Defense presented detailed and extensive revisions in the Statement of Policy. It is our understanding that most of these revisions were proposed not to reflect any substantive differences with the previous draft on the part of the Department of Defense, but rather to pacify the Joint Secretaries who were unhappy with some of the wording of 135/1.
Only the Statement of Policy has been changed since you last read the paper. These changes are underlined in red in the copy in your book. One policy question is involved in acceptance of the paper as it now stands. This concerns Paragraph 9b (page 8).
In the earlier paper this paragraph read:
“b. Be increasingly willing to commit military forces or material, as appropriate and in cooperation with its allies, in support of its objectives in specific geographic areas, and to this end include in the reexamination under paragraph 9a above the necessary study of requirements and capabilities. At the same time the United States should encourage and as appropriate assist in the development of indigenous forces and regional defense arrangements capable of bearing an increasing share of responsibility for resisting local communist aggression. When U.S. forces are committed to [Page 135] combat a local aggression, the action should whenever possible be of sufficient strength and scope to effect a decision favorable to the United States.”
The present paragraph reads:
“b. Encourage and as appropriate assist in the development of indigenous forces and regional defense and collective security arrangements capable of sharing responsibility for resisting local communist aggression. At the same time the United States should be increasingly willing, in support of its security objectives in key geographical areas, to use its resources, as appropriate in cooperation with its allies, and to take collective military action against aggression. To this end, the reexamination called for under subparagraph a above should include the necessary study of requirements, capabilities and appropriate arrangements. Any decision to use United States forces would, of course, be made at the time in the light of the prevailing circumstances.”
The revised paragraph appears to be a considerable watering down of the earlier wording “to commit military forces”. In addition, it emphasizes “collective military action” and limits promised action to supporting “security objectives”. In effect, revised wording goes no further than existing policy. However, Mr. Nitze and I recommend that that you accept the revised language.
Paragraph 11 on economic measures and international trade policy studies is acceptable to Mr. Thorp.
The new wording in Paragraph 14 on mobilization policy is Defense language and is acceptable.
Paragraph 1 now includes the reference to peace and the UN. Reluctantly, the Defense representative on the Senior Staff agreed to drop its proposed rewriting of the fundamental objectives of the U.S. and Mr. Lovett will be satisfied, we hope, with this language.
Civil Defense is apparently satisfied with Paragraph 7 as revised.
NSRB will propose no further changes but has already informed the Senior Staff of a forthcoming paper dealing with the relationship between passive defense and military defense programs.
[Here follows discussion of another item on the National Security Council agenda.]
- Pursuant to NSC Action No. 668–a (see footnote 7, p. 123) various appropriate agencies had submitted to the NSC Senior Staff Assistants revisions of the undated draft Statement of Policy proposed by the NSC and printed as the enclosure to NSC 135/1 of Aug. 15, 1952, p. 81. The Senior Staff Assistants issued their own revised draft Statement of Policy on Sept. 11, and it was circulated by Lay on Sept. 16 as NSC 135/2. Documentation on the agency and Senior Staff revisions of NSC 135/1 and the text of NSC 135/2 are in PPS files, lot 64 D 563, “Review of NSC 68 & 114.”↩
- See the memorandum by Walmsley, Sept. 4, p. 125.↩