751G.5 MSP/2–2454
The Ambassador at Saigon (Heath) to the Under Secretary of State (Smith)
Dear Bedell: The question of General John O’Daniel’s assignment to Saigon as Chief of MAAG has finally been settled. General Navarre has accepted his assignment here but on the clear understanding that he is to have no authoritative participation in the conduct of the war or in the training of the Vietnamese Army.
I personally am quite happy over “Iron Mike’s” assignment here. I like him as an individual and admire him as a soldier, than which there is no finer word of praise. With the confidence which Admiral Radford and others place in him and his own very considerable powers of persuasion, he should be a fine advocate in Washington for the situation in Indochina, which is of such importance to our own national security.
Having said all this, however, I feel it is my duty to go on record as stating that General Navarre, while personally liking him, entertains a very low opinion of O’Daniel’s understanding of the peculiar problems of this war and of his solutions for overcoming them. I must say that, on the basis of my own observation of him during his four visits to Indochina, I likewise do not value him as a military advisor for the strategic and tactical conduct of this particular war.
On his last visit here he left a memorandum with Navarre containing the suggestion that the Tonkin Delta be ringed with an increased number of concrete fortifications, the whole surrounded by a Maginot Line of barbed wire. I won’t go into an analysis of this suggestion beyond saying that, given the near balance of forces between the two belligerents, such a solution would be not only impractical at present but derogatory to our aim to inflict decisive defeat on the Viet Minh as soon as possible. I know that Navarre regarded this suggestion as just plain ridiculous and I personally have heard “Iron Mike”, who is always popping out with ideas, propose other “solutions” to the French that had little relevancy to the facts of this war.
So, if it is thought that “Iron Mike” is going to be an effective counselor, improver and “stiffener” of Navarre’s conduct of this war, the chances are not too good. Because of Navarre’s present opinion of him, General O’Daniel has two strikes against him for such a role. It may be that, living with this situation, “Iron Mike” will get a sounder appreciation of the characteristics of this war and cure himself of his previous habit of bouncing out with ill-considered “solutions”, which at best are annoying to the French Commander-in-Chief. I hope so, but I feel impelled, with my knowledge of “Iron Mike’s” aggressive [Page 1077] personality and his tendency to be “set in his ways”, to state that there is some danger that he may irritate rather than influence favorably General Navarre. We in the Embassy will do our best to avoid such development but I think you should be aware it may occur in spite of anything we can do.1
Sincerely yours,
- In a letter to Heath of Mar. 12, Under Secretary Smith stated that he also had had misgivings regarding the appointment of General O’Daniel, but felt unable to make further representations with the Department of Defense. (751G.5 MSP/2–2454)↩