DOCSLIB.ORG

Rearming at the Dawn of the Cold War Louis Johnson, George Marshall, and Robert Lovett 1949-1952

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Rearming at the Dawn of the Cold War Louis Johnson, George Marshall, and Robert Lovett 1949-1952 Establishing theFEBRUARY Secretary’s Role 2012 Rearming at the Dawn of the Cold War Louis Johnson, George Marshall, and Robert Lovett 1949-1952 Special Study 2 Jeffrey A. Larsen and Robert M. Shelala II Historical Office Office of the Secretary of Defense Cold War Foreign Policy Series • Special Study 2 Establishing the Secretary’s Role Rearming at the Dawn of the Cold War Louis Johnson, George Marshall, and Robert Lovett 1949-1952 Cover Photos: Louis Johnson is sworn in as Secretary of Defense, March 28, 1949; President Harry Truman meets in the Oval Office with Secretary of Defense George Marshall and Deputy Secretary of Defense Robert Lovett, 1951. Source: U.S. Army/ Truman Presidential Library, used with permission. Cover Design: OSD Graphics, Pentagon. Cold War Foreign Policy Series • Special Study 2 Establishing the Secretary’s Role Rearming at the Dawn of the Cold War Louis Johnson, George Marshall, and Robert Lovett 1949-1952 Special Study 2 Jeffrey A. Larsen and Robert M. Shelala II Series Editors Erin R. Mahan, Ph.D. Chief Historian, Office of the Secretary of Defense Jeffrey A. Larsen, Ph.D. President, Larsen Consulting Group Published for the Historical Office Office of the Secretary of Defense by National Defense University Press February 2012 ii iii Cold War Foreign Policy Series • Special Study 2 Rearming at the Dawn of the Cold War Contents Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or implied within are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Department of Defense, the Historical Office of the Office of Foreword..........................................vii the Secretary of Defense, Larsen Consulting Group, or any other agency of the Federal Government. Executive Summary...................................ix Cleared for public release; distribution unlimited. Louis Johnson in Command ............................1 Portions of this work may be quoted or reprinted without permission, NATO and the Military Assistance Program ................6 provided that a standard source credit line is included. The Office of the Historian to the Secretary of Defense would appreciate a courtesy copy New Threats: The Soviet Atomic Test and of reprints or reviews. China’s Communist Revolution..........................8 NSC 68...........................................13 Implementing NSC 68: The Korean War and German Rearmament ................16 The Changing of the Guard............................19 The Marshall-Lovett Legacy............................25 Conclusion ........................................30 Notes.............................................33 About the Authors...................................41 iv v Cold War Foreign Policy Series • Special Study 2 Rearming at the Dawn of the Cold War Foreword This is the second special study in a series by the Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) Historical Office that emphasizes the Secretary’s role in the U.S. foreign policy making process and how the position evolved between 1947 and the early 1990s. The study presented here examines the last 4 years of the Harry S. Truman administration and a succession of Secretaries of Defense who served during the Korean War: Louis Johnson, George Marshall, and Robert Lovett. These three Secretaries took divergent approaches to meeting their mandate from President Truman in an era of increasing foreign policy and national security challenges. The study is not meant to be a comprehensive or detailed look at the Secretary’s involvement in foreign affairs. But as a member of the President’s Cabinet and the National Security Council and the person charged with managing the largest and most complex department in the government, the Secretary of Defense routinely participates in a variety of actions that affect the substance and conduct of U.S. affairs abroad. More influential at some times than at others, the Secretary of Defense has consistently been a key figure among the President’s senior advisors. Concern with foreign affairs goes to the very essence of defense and military policy. That foreign policy consumes a large portion of the Secretary of Defense’s time is not surprising. Without some notion of foreign threats and challenges, the Secretary and his staff would operate virtually in the dark when considering such crucial and contentious matters as the scale and scope of research and development for new weapons, the procurement of equipment and supplies, the allocation of resources among the Services, and the general size and readiness of the Armed Forces. Although the foreign affairs aspect of defense policy and management did not vi vii Cold War Foreign Policy Series • Special Study 2 Rearming at the Dawn of the Cold War typically receive much public attention in the early years of the Executive Summary Department of Defense, it has certainly become an omnipresent factor. This series of special studies by the Historical Office is part of an ongoing effort to highlight various aspects of the Secretary’s mission As the first U.S. Secretary of Defense, James Forrestal did not have and achievements. This is the second study in a nine-part series on the opportunity to lead the Pentagon under the expanded powers the role of the Secretary of Defense in U.S. foreign policy making of the National Security Act as amended in 1949. His successor, during the Cold War. This series began as a book manuscript by Louis Johnson, committed much time and effort to advance Dr. Steven Rearden, author of The Formative Years, 1947–1950, President Harry S. Truman’s goals of integrating the National in our Secretaries of Defense Historical Series. I wish to thank Dr. Military Establishment into a single, cohesive executive entity, Jeffrey Larsen for his efforts in serializing Dr. Rearden’s previously as well as of economizing national security. Benefiting from the unpublished manuscript. I also wish to thank Dr. Alfred Goldberg, National Security Act amendments, Johnson enlarged the Office former OSD Chief Historian, and Dr. Lawrence Kaplan for their of the Secretary of Defense, cut personnel in the Armed Forces, critique and helpful suggestions. Thanks also to OSD Graphics, stopped the Navy flush-deck supercarrier procurement effort, and especially Kathleen Jones, for designing the cover and formatting favored strategic nuclear forces over more costly conventional the special studies series, and to the editorial team at National forces. Defense University Press, particularly Lisa M. Yambrick, for their At the same time Johnson sought to establish the power of the support. Secretary of Defense, he also was driving a wedge between the We anticipate that future study series will cover a variety of defense Defense and State Departments as tensions grew between himself topics. We invite you to peruse our other publications at <http:// and Secretary of State Dean Acheson over the crafting of foreign history.defense.gov/>. policy. To gain an edge over Acheson, Johnson attempted to influence policy in the National Security Council and limited Erin R. Mahan Defense-State communications. While not an enthusiast of the Chief Historian treaty that created it, Johnson would play an important role in Office of the Secretary of Defense orchestrating the establishment of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, providing member states with the logistical and material support necessary to create a strong alliance. The 1949 Soviet nuclear weapons test and the Communist revolution in China triggered a recalibration in the U.S. threat perception of the Soviet Union and China. These events would push two issues to the top of the national security agenda for the Truman administration: the development of the hydrogen bomb, and the reevaluation of U.S. grand strategy. Johnson became a viii ix Cold War Foreign Policy Series • Special Study 2 Rearming at the Dawn of the Cold War strong advocate of the hydrogen bomb, a weapon that would help in making the Secretary of Defense a key actor in foreign policy ensure a qualitative edge over the Soviet nuclear arsenal. The making while fostering a positive relationship with the State Defense Department’s isolation from the State Department and Department. The more amicable environment between Defense Johnson’s own reluctance to participate in joint policy planning and State as well as the greater salience of security issues in foreign led to the State Department taking the lead in shaping the grand policy set the stage for the empowerment of the Secretary of strategy published in the report known as National Security Defense in the policy realm that Forrestal had sought and Johnson Council 68 (NSC 68). had fought to obtain. However, the challenges of safeguarding the defense budget and handling the administration of such a vast The requirements for containment delineated in NSC 68, coupled organization complicated the role of the Secretary of Defense, with the demand for an American response to the invasion of as did the requirement of pursuing a budget that balanced fiscal South Korea, served as the catalyst for a shift from economy to prudence with meeting national security demands. Johnson’s rearmament. This shift, along with the sharp antagonism between tenure would serve as a caution that tilting too far toward the lower Johnson and Acheson, eventually brought an end to Johnson’s end of the budgetary spectrum could be detrimental to national tenure as the second Secretary of Defense. security. Marshall and Lovett learned that lesson and strengthened the Office of the Secretary
Load more

Recommended publications
  • NSC–68 Recognized the Massive Changes in the Postwar World and Set the Stage for a New Kind of Peacetime Force
    NSC–68 recognized the massive changes in the postwar world and set the stage for a new kind of peacetime force. The Blueprint for Cold War Defense By Herman S. Wolk HE years between the end of World War II in 1945 and the outbreak of the Korean War in 1950 produced a series of startling international events that forced great responsibility upon the Air Force and resulted, 50 years ago, in a full-scale reassessment of US national security policy. The result of this review was a classified National Security Council document known Tas NSC-68. It had not been implemented when war broke out in Korea. Indeed, it had not yet even been formally approved. However, NSC-68 marked a milestone in military planning and set the stage for what was to become an enormous US military buildup to counter Communist aggression worldwide. The creation of Soviet satellite states in Eastern Europe and the blockade of Berlin by the Soviet Union in 1948 led to a decision (NSC-20) by President Harry S. Truman to emphasize atomic strategic deterrence. The same events also led to the April 1949 formation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The Air Force, meanwhile, also reacted to European events. In October 1948, the Secretary of the Air Force, Stuart Symington, and the USAF Chief of Staff, Gen. Hoyt S. Vandenberg, dispatched Lt. Gen. Curtis E. LeMay to Offutt AFB, Neb. LeMay’s mission: Revitalize Strategic Air Command and establish it as the major instrument of deterrence and a pillar of US foreign policy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Security Lexicon from Westphalia to the Present a Cautionary Tale
    THE SECURITY LEXICON FROM WESTPHALIA TO THE PRESENT A CAUTIONARY TALE MAX G. MANWARING, PH.D. A new and dangerous dynamic is at work around the world today. That new dynamic involves the migration of some of the monopoly of political power (i.e., the authoritative allocation of values in a society) from the traditional nation-state to unconventional actors such as the Islamic State (ISIS), transnational criminal organizations, Leninist-Maoist insurgents, tribal militias, pri- vate armies, enforcer gangs and other modern mercenaries. These actors conduct their own political-psychological type of war against various state and other non-state adversaries. These violent politicized non-state actors are being ignored; or, alternatively, are being considered too hard to deal with. That misunderstanding must inevitably result in an epochal transition from traditional Western nation-state systems and their liberal democratic values to something else dependent on the values—good, bad, or non-existent—of the winner.1 To help civilian and military leaders, policy-makers, opinion-makers, and anyone else who might have the responsibility for dealing with modern conflict come to grips analytically with the security dilemma and other realities of the 21st century political-psychological environment, this paper seeks to do three things. In Part One, we outline a bit of essential history that takes us from the Westphalian Peace Treaty of 1648 to the present. In that context, we briefly consider a con- temporary example of the traditional military-centric approach to national and international security that is still alive and well. That is, Chinese military activity in the South China Sea.
    [Show full text]
  • The American Experience with Diplomacy and Military Restraint I
    PART I: THE AmERICAN EXPERIENCE WITH DIPLOMACY AND MILITARY RESTRAINT i. Orphaned Diplomats: The American Struggle to Match Diplomacy with Power Jeremi Suri E. Gordon Fox Professor of History and Director, European Union Center of Excellence, University of Wisconsin, Madison Benjamin Franklin spent the American Revolution in Paris. He had helped to draft the Declaration of Independence in the summer of 1776, one of the most radical documents of the eighteenth century—sparking rebellion on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean. Serving as a representative for the Continental Congress in France during the next decade, Franklin became a celebrity. He was the enlightened idealist from the frontier, the man of principled action who enthralled onlookers in the rigid European class societies of the 1770s and ’80s. Franklin embodied the American critique of Old World society, economy, and diplomacy. He was one of many American revolutionaries to take aim at the degenerate world of powdered wigs, fancy uniforms, and silver-service dinners where the great men of Europe decided the fate of distant societies. Franklin was a representative of the enduring American urge to replace the diplomacy of aristocrats with the openness and freedom of democrats.1 Despite his radical criticisms of aristocracy, Franklin was also a prominent participant in Parisian salons. To the consternation of John Adams and John Jay, he dined most evenings with the most conservative elements of French high society. Unlike Adams, he did not refuse to dress the part. For all his frontiers- man claims, Franklin relished high-society silver-service meals, especially if generous portions of wine were available for the guests.
    [Show full text]
  • National Security and Constitutional Rights in Korea
    National Security and Constitutional Rights in Korea - National Security Law, Past and Present Park Won Soon, Human Rights Lawyer Chair, Executive Committee, PSPD Director, Beautiful Foundation As of 25 August, of the 99 political prisoners in detention, 54 were detained on charges under the National Security Law. Of these, the majority were arrested under Article 7, which punishes membership of organizations deemed to "benefit the enemy", improving relations with North Korea prompted debate on reform of the National Security Law. President Kim Dae-Jung apparently encouraged by his award of the Nobel Peace Prize, announced his support for revisions to the National Security Law, but opposition to reform in the National Assembly from both the GNP and the ULD prevented significant revisions. (Amnesty International Report 2001) 1. Introduction De Facto Constitution - The National Security Law The National Security Law (NSL) in Korea has been called as a de facto constitution. It meas the NSL was under no other laws including the Constitution. Even though it is inferior to the Constitution namely, no legal enforcement agencies and the court could not challenge unconstitutionality of the law in reality. Korean peninsula has been one of the powder magazine where small incident could lead to big armed conflict. As a matter of fact, in 1950, there broke out Korean war in which over 3 million people were killed. Since then, national security has been regarded as the most important and senstive agenda among Korean people. Basic freedom and human rights enshrined in the Constitution has been sacrificed in the name of national security.
    [Show full text]
  • Dean G. Acheson Oral History Interview – JFK #1, 4/27/1964 Administrative Information
    Dean G. Acheson Oral History Interview – JFK #1, 4/27/1964 Administrative Information Creator: Dean G(ooderham) Acheson Interviewer: Lucius D. Battle Date of Interview: April 27, 1964 Place of Interview: Washington, D.C. Length: 34 pp. Biographical Note Acheson, Secretary of State under President Harry S. Truman, talks about foreign policy matters during the John F. Kennedy administration and his advice and activities during that time. He also reads the text of several letters he wrote to JFK. Access Open. Usage Restrictions According to the deed of gift signed February 15, 1965, copyright of these materials has been assigned to the United States Government. Copyright The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be “used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research.” If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excesses of “fair use,” that user may be liable for copyright infringement. This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copying order if, in its judgment, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of copyright law. The copyright law extends its protection to unpublished works from the moment of creation in a tangible form. Direct your questions concerning copyright to the reference staff. Transcript of Oral History Interview These electronic documents were created from transcripts available in the research room of the John F.
    [Show full text]
  • NSC 68: America's Cold War Blueprint
    NSC 68: America’s Cold War Blueprint Advisor: Philip Brenner, Professor, School of International Service, American University © 2015 National Humanities Center Framing Question Why did the United States believe it had a responsibility to engage the Soviet Union in a cold war, and why was that war a global conflict? Understanding Between the end of World War II and 1950 American policy makers debated how to interpret the Soviet Union’s takeover of countries in eastern Europe and what to do about it. Eventually, they concluded that the Soviet Union sought to eliminate freedom throughout the globe and bring nation after nation under its rule. They decided that the United States, as the world’s chief proponent of democracy, should stop Soviet expansion and defend freedom wherever it was threatened for moral reasons and to ensure world peace through American strength and dominance. Text “ A Report to the National Security Council by the Executive Secretary on United States Objectives and Programs for National Security, April 14, 1950” (excerpts) Background Even during World War II, when the United States and the Soviet Union were allied against Nazi Germany, relations between the two nations were characterized by tension and distrust. When peace came in 1945, relations did not improve. In fact, they grew worse. The former allies disagreed on many issues, but the chief source of conflict was the question of what to do about defeated Germany and Soviet-occupied Eastern Europe. The Soviets demanded that Germany make huge payments to repair the damage it did to their country. To insure that it would never attack them again, they insisted that Germany — which had been divided into American, British, French, and Soviet occupation zones — be stripped of its ability to make war.
    [Show full text]
  • Primary Source Document with Questions (Dbqs) the POTSDAM DECLARATION (JULY 26, 1945) Introduction the Dropping of the Atomic Bo
    Primary Source Document with Questions (DBQs) THE POTSDAM DECLARATION (JULY 26, 1945) Introduction The dropping of the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki remains among the most controversial events in modern history. Historians have actively debated whether the bombings were necessary, what effect they had on bringing the war in the Pacific to an expeditious end, and what other options were available to the United States. These very same questions were also contentious at the time, as American policymakers struggled with how to use a phenomenally powerful new technology and what the long-term impact of atomic weaponry might be, not just on the Japanese, but on domestic politics, America’s international relations, and the budding Cold War with the Soviet Union. In retrospect, it is clear that the reasons for dropping the atomic bombs on Japan, just like the later impact of nuclear technology on world politics, were complex and intertwined with a variety of issues that went far beyond the simple goal of bringing World War II to a rapid close. The Potsdam Declaration was issued on July 26, 1945 by U.S. President Harry Truman, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, and President Chiang Kai-shek of the Republic of China, who were meeting in Potsdam, Germany to consider war strategy and post-war policy. Soviet leader Joseph Stalin also attended the Potsdam Conference but did not sign the Declaration, since the Soviet Union did not enter the war against Japan until August 8, 1945. Document Excerpts with Questions From Japan’s Decision to Surrender, by Robert J.C.
    [Show full text]
  • The Cold War
    The American Yawp Chapter 25 – The Cold War Quiz 1. What was the first military action taken by the United States against international communism? a. American soldiers fought against the Red Army during the Russian civil war b. American soldiers fought isolated battles against the Soviet Union during World War II c. The Berlin Airlift d. The Korean War 2. Greece and Turkey were early flashpoints in the Cold War. How did the United States respond to unrest in Greece and Turkey in 1947? a. The United States established long range missiles in these nations, capable of reaching Moscow b. The United States sent military advisers to train anti-communist forces in both countries c. The United States actively intervened in Greece but not in Turkey d. The United States sent $400 million to both nations to be used in resisting communism 3. What was the purpose of the Marshall Plan? a. Rebuild Western Europe b. Create new markets for American goods c. Generate support for Capitalist democracies d. All of the above 4. When was the Atlantic Charter issued? a. After World War I b. Before the United States entered World War II c. After World War II d. When the Soviet Union invaded Korea 5. What was the message of NSC-68? a. A warning that the idea of the domino theory may represent a slippery slope commitment that would result in dozens of new wars b. An economic argument for isolationism c. A call for a tripling of the annual defense budget for the purpose of stopping communism d.
    [Show full text]
  • ICS Portugal
    Integrated Country Strategy PORTUGAL FOR PUBLIC RELEASE FOR PUBLIC RELEASE Table of Contents I. Chief of Mission Priorities .......................................................................................................... 2 II. Mission Goals and Framework ................................................................................................... 5 III. Mission Objectives ..................................................................................................................... 6 IV. Management Objectives .......................................................................................................... 11 FOR PUBLIC RELEASE Approved: August 6, 2018 1 FOR PUBLIC RELEASE I. Chief of Mission Priorities As we adopt this new Integrated Country Strategy, Portugal is reaping the benefits of a hard- won economic recovery while raising its international profile. The economy has returned to growth, while rating agencies’ elevation of Portuguese debt to investment grade will cut the cost of capital to finance further economic expansion. Effective Portuguese diplomacy has enabled Lisbon to punch above its weight in EU and global affairs. Portugal’s highly professional armed forces are looking forward to gaining new capabilities and to making a greater contribution to European, African, and Asian security through more deployments as Portugal makes the investments necessary to fulfill its Wales pledge to NATO. Coupled with Portugal’s avowed Atlantic orientation, all of these factors paint a picture of opportunity for
    [Show full text]
  • APPENDIX D Common Abbreviations
    ABBREVIATIONS APPENDIX D Common Abbreviations BIS Bureau of Industry and Security (Department of Commerce) BW Biological Weapons or Biological Warfare CBP Customs and Border Protection (Department of Homeland Security) CBRN Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Weapons CCDC Collection Concepts Development Center CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention CIA Central Intelligence Agency CIFA Counterintelligence Field Activity (Department of Defense) CPD Counterproliferation Division (CIA) CTC Counterterrorist Center CW Chemical Weapons or Chemical Warfare D&D Denial and Deception DCI Director of Central Intelligence DCIA Director of Central Intelligence Agency DHS Department of Homeland Security DIA Defense Intelligence Agency DNI Director of National Intelligence DO Directorate of Operations (CIA) DOD Department of Defense DOE Department of Energy DOJ Department of Justice DS&T Directorate of Science and Technology (CIA) FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation FBIS Foreign Broadcast Information Service FIG Field Intelligence Group (FBI) FISA Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act HPSCI House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence HUMINT Human Intelligence IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency IAEC Iraqi Atomic Energy Commission 591 APPENDIX D ICE Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Department of Homeland Security) INC Iraqi National Congress INR Bureau of Intelligence and Research (Department of State) INS Immigration and Naturalization Services IRTPA Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 ISB Intelligence
    [Show full text]
  • Letter to Europe
    LETTER TO EUROPE by Philip H Gordon In an open letter, Washington’s top Europe-watcher proposes a “new deal” to help drag transatlantic relations out of their postwar low. The future of the west is at stake EAR FRIENDS.How did it come to this? I icans and Europeans on a range of issues. The end of cannot remember a time when the gulf the cold war, the rise of US military, political and eco- between Europeans and Americans was nomic power during the 1990s, and Europe’s preoc- so wide. For the past couple of years, I cupation with the challenges of integration and Dhave argued that the Iraq crisis was a sort of “perfect enlargement, have combined to accentuate these dif- storm” unlikely to be repeated, and that many of the ferences. But we have had different strategic perspec- recent tensions resulted from the personalities and tives—and fights about strategy—for years, and that shortcomings of key actors on both sides. The never prevented us from working together towards transatlantic alliance has overcome many crises common goals. And despite the provocations from before, and given our common interests and values ideologues on both sides, this surely remains possible and the enormous challenges we face, I have been today. Leaders still have options, and decisions to confident that we could also overcome this latest spat. make. They shape their environment as much as they Now I just don’t know any more. After a series of are shaped by it. The right choices could help put the increasingly depressing trips to Europe, even my world’s main liberal democracies back in the same optimism is being tested.
    [Show full text]
  • Timeline of the Cold War
    Timeline of the Cold War 1945 Defeat of Germany and Japan February 4-11: Yalta Conference meeting of FDR, Churchill, Stalin - the 'Big Three' Soviet Union has control of Eastern Europe. The Cold War Begins May 8: VE Day - Victory in Europe. Germany surrenders to the Red Army in Berlin July: Potsdam Conference - Germany was officially partitioned into four zones of occupation. August 6: The United States drops atomic bomb on Hiroshima (20 kiloton bomb 'Little Boy' kills 80,000) August 8: Russia declares war on Japan August 9: The United States drops atomic bomb on Nagasaki (22 kiloton 'Fat Man' kills 70,000) August 14 : Japanese surrender End of World War II August 15: Emperor surrender broadcast - VJ Day 1946 February 9: Stalin hostile speech - communism & capitalism were incompatible March 5 : "Sinews of Peace" Iron Curtain Speech by Winston Churchill - "an "iron curtain" has descended on Europe" March 10: Truman demands Russia leave Iran July 1: Operation Crossroads with Test Able was the first public demonstration of America's atomic arsenal July 25: America's Test Baker - underwater explosion 1947 Containment March 12 : Truman Doctrine - Truman declares active role in Greek Civil War June : Marshall Plan is announced setting a precedent for helping countries combat poverty, disease and malnutrition September 2: Rio Pact - U.S. meet 19 Latin American countries and created a security zone around the hemisphere 1948 Containment February 25 : Communist takeover in Czechoslovakia March 2: Truman's Loyalty Program created to catch Cold War
    [Show full text]