Office of the Historian

162. Memorandum of Conversation1

Geneva, June 5, 1959
[Facsimile Page 1]

SUBJECT

  • Strategic Concept and Military paragraphs of NSC 5810/1

PARTICIPANTS

  • State
    • Secretary Herter
    • Gerard C. Smith
  • Defense
    • Secretary McElroy
    • John N. Irwin II

The Secretary of State opened the discussion by saying that his review of the new language which State had proposed in the Planning Board for the military paragraphs of NSC 5310/1 suggested that the place to make changes was in paragraph 10A rather than paragraph 14. The Secretary of Defense read the State redraft very carefully and expressed a measure of sympathy with the thrust of the proposed changes. He asked whether State would agree to tie a clause on the use of nuclear weapons when required to achieve national objectives to the first sentence of revised paragraph 10A rather than make it a separate sentence as in the State redraft. Secretary Herter agreed that this could be done.

Mr. Irwin said that the proposed change in paragraph 10A could have a great impact on the budget and urged that the results of the Gray target mix study be awaited before making a decision on paragraph 10A.

Secretary McElroy said he assumed that there would be no change in hardware flowing from the proposed change in paragraph 10A as last year’s limited war study had shown [Facsimile Page 2] that our limited war capability was adequate. Mr. Smith reminded Mr. McElroy that that study was based on the assumption that only the US would use nuclear weapons, although a subsequent SNIE on the Quemoy situation cast considerable doubt on that assumption. The Secretary of Defense commented that he could not understand why this unrealistic assumption was used. Both Mr. Smith and Mr. Irwin pointed out that any other assumption would have contradicted the current strategic concept.

The Secretary of Defense then asked whether the proposed change in paragraph 10A would result in budgetary changes in FY 1962. Mr. Smith replied that he thought not in that year but was bound to say that in later years he thought it would. Secretary McElroy indicated concern at this prospect.

[Typeset Page 733]

The Secretary of State inquired concerning the effect upon our NATO forces of withdrawals for limited military operations in other areas. Secretary McElroy indicated that this was manageable.

There was discussion of certain aspects of the Quemoy situation of last year and of the nature of hostilities in the event of an attack by Communist China. (Reference was made in this connection to the status of the advance authorization for the use of nuclear weapons.)

At one point Mr. Irwin said that the two Departments should agree for the present that we want no charge in philosophy and, having done so, agree that paragraph 10A be amended to delete the reference to nuclear weapons as conventional weapons. Mr. Smith pointed out that this language change would constitute a fundamental philosophical change.

The group concluded that they would not try to reach any quick decision on revising the military paragraphs of NSC 5810/1.

  1. Source: Strategic concept and NSC 5810/1. Top Secret. 2 pp. NARA, RG 59, S/P Files: Lot 67 D 548, Military and Naval Policy.↩