102. Memorandum for the Record by the President’s Staff Secretary (Goodpaster)1
I showed the memorandum of December 312 to each of the Defense Secretaries and the Chiefs of Staff to obtain their confirmation of its accuracy. They confirmed that the statement was correct. Several had comments relating to it.
Mr. Wilson said there would be no problem if the President were willing to say that he set the “ceiling.” I indicated that as I understood the process, the President had not set a ceiling, but had decided upon a figure between the present program and the one proposed, after considering and discussing the main elements of the program. I understood the position to be that of course he would say that the determination is his, but wished to know and to state that the others join him in it.
Governor Brucker emphasized the need which he foresaw next year for added funds for post and station maintenance, and asked if this feeling on his part impaired his concurrence with the President’s draft statement. I told him that it would seem to do so, if he held this view as a condition to concurring in the statement, but not if he holds it as an intent to press the matter strongly next year, but with confidence that the outcome decided on next year will be a sound one. He said he was inclined to regard it as the latter.
Secretary Quarles discussed and studied at length the reference to the program as “well-balanced and satisfactory.” He wondered whether the first part of that sentence and the last part were not in contradiction; I told him that, as I understood the matter, a Chief or a Secretary might feel that there were areas he would like to have strengthened in his own service, in some cases in order to have certain operational capabilities in his own service, but that he might recognize that the program balanced out this deficiency with capabilities provided in other services—or that even taking into account the deficiency, the resulting over-all military capability is consistent with acceptable risk and reasonable security for the United States. He said that he would interpret these words in the sense of “sound over-all,” accepting that this expression included “satisfactory over-all.” He accepted that the program is well balanced as regards use of the resources made available to the Air Force. He said that the statement goes further than he has up to this point obtained General Twining’s endorsement (he did not indicate that he had sought General Twining’s [Page 396] endorsement for going this far); he said that his actions should not in any sense be understood to commit or represent General Twining’s view— General Twining would have an independent reaction to offer. Secretary Quarles gave assurance of his loyal acceptance of the President’s judgment as to this program as a wise and reasonable one and of his own loyal performance in supporting it. He had asked whether his responsibility with regard to the passage concerning degree of risk and degree of security was simply to be willing to accept the President’s judgment in the matter, and I indicated that as I would understand the matter, it would be a question of exercising his own judgment on these matters insofar as he felt capable of doing so, and finding his own judgment consistent with the President’s and then feeling confidence in the President’s judgment on matters he felt to be outside his own competence. Mr. Quarles said he was in position to sign the statement after this discussion.
General Taylor asked what his signature would imply with regard to answering questions asked of him in the Congress, and referred to various points in the budget which are “soft” or “weak” from the Army’s standpoint. I told him that I understood the matter to be considered basically one of attitude, and that if these points were explained while maintaining adherence to the soundness of the budget and program over-all—and not as a means and with the intent of breaking down the budget—that the action would be consistent with his signature.
General Twining had no comment on the memorandum. Secretary Thomas, Admiral Radford, Admiral Burke and General Pate expressed strong concurrence. The latter said he planned to have his Legislative Liaison people ask key members of Congress to try to avoid “embarrassing” questions about the budget, i.e., those which would tend to break it down.
Brigadier General USA
- Source: Eisenhower library, Whitman File. Confidential.↩
- See footnote 6, supra.↩