Office of the Historian

232. Memorandum From the Executive Secretary of the National Security Council (Lay) to the National Security Council0

Washington, July 22, 1958.

SUBJECT

  • U.S. Policy Toward Korea

REFERENCES

  • A. NSC 5702/21
  • B. OCB Report on NSC 5702/2, dated June 25, 19582

The enclosed proposed revision3 of paragraphs 9 and 10 of NSC 5702/2, prepared by the NSC Planning Board, is transmitted herewith for consideration by the National Security Council at its meeting on July 31, 1958.4

[Page 475]

Also enclosed, for the information of the Council, is an Annex entitled “Personnel Strengths of ROK, North Korean and Communist Chinese Forces in Korea”.

James S. Lay, Jr.

[Enclosure]

PROPOSED REVISION OF PARAGRAPHS 9 AND 10 OF NSC 5702/2, “U.S. POLICY TOWARD KOREA”

Military

9.

a. Through the period FY 1959 continue to deploy in Korea a minimum of two U.S. infantry divisions, and U.S. Air Force units, rotating on a continuing basis, with an over-all capability at least as great as the capability of the U.S. fighter-bomber wing on station in Korea throughout FY 1958, together with necessary support forces; and complete as practicable the deployment of one U.S. Air Force tactical missile unit.

b. Continue replacing equipment of U.S. forces in Korea, including planes, with improved models of such equipment as and when required for military reasons.

c. Continue equipping U.S. forces in Korea with modern weapons, [1 line of source text not declassified].

10.
With respect to ROK forces:
a.
Following formalization of the agreement to reduce the ROK forces to an over-all authorized and actual ceiling of 630,000, assist in supporting the ROK forces at this level through CY 1959, with individual service components as follows: the ROK Army not to exceed 18 active and 10 reserve divisions; the ROK Navy at a level of approximately 60 combatant vessels and one Marine division; the ROK Air Force at a level of 10 air squadrons, including 6 jet fighter-bomber squadrons.
b.
Plan during FY 1959 for gradual further reduction in the ROK Army forces [in the longer range].5 Such planning would take account of the international and the enemy situation, the effect of the initial [Page 476] reductions, the effect on the ROK economy, the modernization of U.S. forces in Korea, and the over-all level of U.S. military assistance programs worldwide.
c.
Continue military assistance to the Republic of Korea to carry out these military programs and objectives.

[Here follows a one-page Annex outlining the personnel strength of ROK, North Korean, and Chinese forces in Korea; see Supplement.]

  1. Source: Department of State, S/P Files: Lot 62 D 1, Korea, U.S. Policy Toward (NSC 5817, NSC 5907). Top Secret. Also sent to the Secretary of the Treasury, Director of the Bureau of the Budget, Chairman of the JCS, and Director of Central Intelligence.↩
  2. See footnote 1, Document 225.↩
  3. See footnote 2, Document 225.↩
  4. The Joint Chiefs of Staff in a July 29 memorandum to the Secretary of Defense, circulated to the NSC on July 31 by Lay, recommended adoption of the “majority view” on the proposed revisions in paragraphs 9 and 10 of NSC 5702/2. (Department of State, S/P Files: Lot 62 D 1, Korea, U.S. Policy Toward (NSC 5817, NSC 5907) The only dissent on the Planning Board from the agreed revision of paragraphs 9 and 10 related to paragraph 10b, where alternative language, noted in the footnote in the source text, was proposed by the Bureau of the Budget, with Treasury concurrence. A July 30 memorandum from Robertson to the Secretary, recommended that Dulles support the original language, “in the longer range,” when the NSC took up the question of the revision of paragraph 10 of NSC 5702/2. There is no indication of the Secretary’s response to this recommendation on the copy of this memorandum found ibid.; see Supplement.↩
  5. The NSC did not get to the Korean item at its meeting on July 31 and carried the item over to its meeting on August 7 (see Document 236).↩
  6. Budget, with Treasury concurrence, proposes the substitution of “beginning in CY 1960.” [Footnote and brackets in the source text.]↩