790.5/7–2854: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Embassy in the United Kingdom1
589. It very important that from beginning prospective members SEA collective defense Australia France New Zealand Philippines Thailand UK and certain other interested Govts understand US concept SEA pact. In particular they should know we do not envisage SEA security pact developing into NATO-type organization with large permanent machinery under which large local forces-in-being are to be created with substantial US financial support and to which US would be committed contribute forces for local defense. On contrary US envisages security pact which will 1) deter Communist overt aggression and 2) permit US and others assist in increasing stability local areas, improving effectiveness local forces both military and police and hence ability local govts prevent Communist infiltration and subversion which seems more probable than overt aggression.
If matter becomes subject conversation you authorized outline US views on general objectives and nature SEA pact making following points which we are making here to Embassies.
- 1.
- Insofar as overt Communist armed aggression concerned, main objective pact should be to deter it. Agreement by parties that armed attack on any of them or on any territories which they should by unanimous agreement designate, would endanger peace and security of each and that each would act to meet common danger in accordance with its constitutional processes, would put Communists on notice aggression would be met by armed action and would provide necessary deterrent against such aggression.
- 2.
- Primary problem however is to frustrate Communist subversion and infiltration in area. Deterrent provided by pact against armed aggression will be of value in instilling confidence this score into govts of area and will thus also operate increase their capacities deal with subversion and infiltration. Improvement in effectiveness military and police forces local countries will also assist them counter subversion and infiltration. This should in fact be primary objective toward which such improvements should be directed. Would be profitless attempt create massive local forces with any object of stopping massive attack. But will be useful improve and streamline military and police establishments in local countries with object reducing possibilities subversion of legitimate govts.
- 3.
- If pact fails deter overt aggression members would then have deal with aggressor in most feasible and most effective manner. [Page 681] Particular types action which should be undertaken would naturally depend upon forces which parties could bring to bear and circumstances at time aggression.
- 4.
- Treaty should have general provision for economic cooperation among members and with other like-minded countries e.g., Colombo Powers Japan etc. in general area. However decision as to best method proceed in economic field will first require considerable US study and subsequently exchanges views with interested countries.
- Drafted by Stelle and MacArthur and cleared by the latter with the Secretary, among others. Sent also to Bangkok, Canberra, Manila, Paris, and Wellington; repeated for information to Colombo, Djakarta, Karachi, New Delhi, Rangoon, Seoul, Taipei, and Tokyo.↩