Page images
PDF
EPUB

of other countries. Their strength in the struggle for freedom depends on the strength of their economic and their social progress.

Earlier in the year I outlined to the Congress a new program for aiding emerging nations; 5 and it is my intention to transmit shortly draft legislation to implement this program, to establish a new Act for International Development, and to add to the figures previously requested, in view of the swift pace of critical events, an additional $250 million for a Presidential Contingency Fund,55 to be used only upon a Presidential determination in each case, with regular and complete reports to the Congress in each case, when there is a sudden and extraordinary drain upon our regular funds which we cannot foresee as illustrated by recent events in southeast Asia-and it makes necessary the use of this emergency reserve. The total amount requested-now raised to $2.65 billion-is both minimal and crucial. I do not see how anyone who is concerned, as we all are, about the growing threats to freedom around the globe-and is asking what more we can do as a people can weaken or oppose the single most important program available for building the frontiers of freedom.

All that I have said makes it clear that we are engaged in a worldwide struggle in which we bear a heavy burden to preserve and promote the ideals that we share with all mankind, or have alien ideals forced upon them. That struggle has highlighted the role of our Information Agency. It is essential that the funds previously requested for this effort be not only approved in full but increased by $2,400,000, to a total just over $121 million.56

This new request is for additional radio and television to Latin America and southeast Asia. These tools are particularly effective and essential in the cities and villages of those great continents as a means of reaching millions of uncertain peoples to tell them of our interest in their fight for freedom. In Latin America we are proposing to increase our Spanish and Portuguese broadcasts to a total of 154 hours a week, compared to 42 hours today, none of which is in Portuguese, the language of about one-third of the people of South America. The Soviets, Red Chinese, and satellites already broadcast into Latin America more than 134 hours a week in Spanish and Portuguese. Communist China alone does more public information broadcasting in our own hemisphere than we do. Moreover, powerful propaganda broadcasts from Habana now are heard throughout Latin America, encouraging new revolutions in several countries.

Similarly, in Laos, Viet-Nam, Cambodia, and Thailand we must communicate our determination and support to those upon whom our hopes for resisting the Communist tide in that continent ultimately depend. Our interest is in the truth.

But while we talk of sharing and building and the competition of ideas, others talk of arms and threaten war. So we have learned to

"See post, doc. 644.

See post, doc. 647.

See post, docs. 658-659.

keep our defenses strong and to cooperate with others in a partnership of self-defense. The events of recent weeks have caused us to look anew at these efforts.

The center of freedom's defense is our network of world alliances, extending from NATO, recommended by a Democratic President and approved by a Republican Congress,57 to SEATO, recommended by a Republican President and approved by a Democratic Congress.58 These alliances were constructed in the 1940's and 1950's; it is our task and responsibility in the sixties to strengthen them.

To meet the changing conditions of power-and power relationships have changed-we have endorsed an increased emphasis on NATO conventional strength. At the same time we are affirming our conviction that the NATO nuclear deterrent must also be kept strong. I have made clear our intention to commit to the NATO command, for this purpose, the five Polaris submarines originally suggested by President Eisenhower, with the possibility, if needed, of more to come.59 Second, a major part of our partnership for self-defense is the military assistance program. The main burden of local defense against local attack, subversion, insurrection, or guerrilla warfare must of necessity rest with local forces. Where these forces have the necessary will and capacity to cope with such threats, our intervention is rarely necessary or helpful. Where the will is present and only capacity is lacking, our military assistance program can be of help.

But this program, like economic assistance, needs a new emphasis. It cannot be extended without regard to the social, political, and military reforms essential to internal respect and stability. The equipment and training provided must be tailored to legitimate local needs and to our own foreign and military policies, not to our supply of military stocks or a local leader's desire for military display. And military assistance can, in addition to its military purposes, make a contribution to economic progress, as do our own Army Engineers. In an earlier message I requested $1.6 billion for military assistance, stating that this would maintain existing force levels but that I could not foresee how much more might be required. It is now clear that this is not enough. The present crisis in southeast Asia, on which the Vice President has made a valuable report, the rising threat of communism in Latin America, the increasing arms traffic in Africa, and all the new pressures on every nation found on the map by tracing your finger along the borders of the Communist bloc in Asia and the Middle East-all make clear the dimension of our needs.

[ocr errors]

60

61

See A Decade of American Foreign Policy: Basic Documents, 1941-1949, pp. 1328-1356.

See American Foreign Policy, Basic Documents: 1950-1955, pp. 912-916 and 923-945.

"Offer made by Secretary of State Herter at the Ministerial Meeting of the NATO Council Dec. 16, 1960; for text of final communiqué of Dec. 18, 1960, see American Foreign Policy: Current Documents, 1960, pp. 317-319. President Kennedy publicly renewed this offer in his speech before the Canadian Parliament May 17, 1961: post, doc. 173.

60 Message of Mar. 22, 1961; post, doc. 644.
See post, docs. 455, 463, 468, 533-534, and 538.

748-787-65-8

I therefore request the Congress to provide a total of $1.885 billion for military assistance in the coming fiscal year-an amount less than that requested a year ago,62 but a minimum which must be assured if we are to help those nations make secure their independence. This must be prudently and wisely spent, and that will be our common endeavor. Military and economic assistance has been a heavy burden on our citizens for a long time, and I recognize the strong pressures against it; but this battle is far from over-it is reaching a crucial stage, and I believe we should participate in it. We cannot merely state our opposition to totalitarian advance without paying the price of helping those now under the greatest pressures.

In line with these developments I have directed a further reinforcement of our own capacity to deter or resist nonnuclear aggression. In the conventional field, with one exception, I find no present need for large new levies of men. What is needed is rather a change of position to give us still further increases in flexibility.

Therefore I am directing the Secretary of Defense to undertake a reorganization and modernization of the Army's divisional structure, to increase its nonnuclear firepower to improve its tactical mobility in any environment, to insure its flexibility to meet any direct or indirect threat, to facilitate its coordination with our major allies, and to provide more modern mechanized divisions in Europe and bring our equipment up to date, and new airborne brigades in both the Pacific and Europe.

And secondly, I am asking the Congress for an additional $100 million to begin the procurement task necessary to reequip this new Army structure with the most modern material. New helicopters, new armored personnel carriers, and new howitzers, for example, must be obtained now.

Third, I am directing the Secretary of Defense to expand rapidly and substantially, in cooperation with our allies, the orientation of existing forces for the conduct of nonnuclear war, paramilitary operations, and sublimited or unconventional wars.

In addition, our special forces and unconventional warfare units will be increased and reoriented. Throughout the services new emphasis must be placed on the special skills and languages which are required to work with local populations.

Fourth, the Army is developing plans to make possible a much more rapid deployment of a major portion of its highly trained reserve forces. When these plans are completed and the reserve is strengthened, 2 combat-equipped divisions, plus their supporting forces-a total of 89,000 men-could be ready in an emergency for operations with but 3 weeks' notice, 2 more divisions with but 5 weeks' notice, and 6 additional divisions and their supporting forces, making a total of 10 divisions, could be deployable with less than 8 weeks' notice. In short, these new plans will allow us to almost double the combat power of the Army in less than 2 months, compared to the nearly 9 months heretofore required.

02

See American Foreign Policy: Current Documents, 1960, pp. 830-836.

Fifth, to enhance the already formidable ability of the Marine Corps to respond to limited war emergencies, I am asking the Congress for $60 million to increase Marine Corps strength to 190,000 men. This will increase the initial impact and staying power of our three Marine divisions and three air wings and provide a trained nucleus for further expansion, if necessary, for self-defense.

Finally, to cite one other area of activities that are both legitimate and necessary as a means of self-defense in an age of hidden perils, our whole intelligence effort must be reviewed and its coordination with other elements of policy assured.63 The Congress and the American people are entitled to know that we will institute whatever new organization, policies, and control are necessary.

One major element of the national security program which this nation has never squarely faced up to is civil defense.

This administration has been looking hard at exactly what civil defense can and cannot do. It cannot be obtained cheaply. It cannot give an assurance of blast protection that will be proof against surprise attack or guaranteed against obsolescence or destruction. And it cannot deter a nuclear attack.

We will deter an enemy from making a nuclear attack only if our retaliatory power is so strong and so invulnerable that he knows he would be destroyed by our response. If we have that strength, civil defense is not needed to deter an attack. If we should ever lack it, civil defense would not be an adequate substitute.

But this deterrent concept assumes rational calculations by rational men. And the history of this planet, and particularly the history of the 20th century, is sufficient to remind us of the possibilities of an irrational attack, a miscalculation, an accidental war, or a war of escalation in which the stakes by each side gradually increase to the point of maximum danger which cannot be either foreseen or deterred. It is on this basis that civil defense can be readily justifiable as insurance for the civilian population in case of an enemy miscalculation. It is insurance we trust will never be needed-but insurance which we could never forgive ourselves for forgoing in the event of catastrophe. Once the validity of this concept is recognized, there is no point in delaying the initiation of a nationwide long-range program of identifying present fallout shelter capacity and providing shelter in new and existing structures. Such a program would protect millions of people against the hazards of radioactive fallout in the event of a large-scale nuclear attack. Effective performance of the entire program not only requires new legislative authority and more funds but also sound organizational arrangements.

Therefore, under the authority vested in me by Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1958,04 I am assigning responsibility for this program to the top civilian authority already responsible for continental defense, the Secretary of Defense. It is important that this function remain civilian, in nature and leadership; and this feature will not be changed.

[blocks in formation]

The Office of Civil and Defense Mobilization will be reconstituted as a small staff agency to assist in the coordination of these functions. To more accurately describe its role, its title should be changed to the Office of Emergency Planning.

65

As soon as those newly charged with these responsibilities have prepared new authorization and appropriation requests, such requests will be transmitted to the Congress for a much strengthened FederalState civil defense program. Such a program will provide Federal funds for identifying fallout shelter capacity in existing structures, and it will include, where appropriate, incorporation of shelter in Federal buildings, new requirements for shelter in buildings constructed with Federal assistance, and matching grants and other incentives for constructing shelter in State and local and private buildings.66

Federal appropriations for civil defense in fiscal 1962 under this program will in all likelihood be more than triple the pending budget requests; and they will increase sharply in subsequent years. Financial participation will also be required from State and local governments and from private citizens. But no insurance is cost-free; and every American citizen and his community must decide for themselves whether this form of survival insurance justifies the expenditure of effort, time, and money. For myself, I am convinced that it does.

I cannot end this discussion of defense and armaments without emphasizing our strongest hope: the creation of an orderly world where disarmament will be possible. Our arms do not prepare for war; they are efforts to discourage and resist the adventures of others that could end in war.

67

That is why it is consistent with these efforts that we continue to press for properly safeguarded disarmament measures. At Geneva, in cooperation with the United Kingdom, we have put forward concrete proposals to make clear our wish to meet the Soviets halfway in an effective nuclear test ban treaty "--the first significant but essential step on the road toward disarmament. Up to now their response has not been what we hoped, but Mr. [Arthur H.] Dean returned last night to Geneva and we intend to go the last mile in patience to secure this gain if we can.

Meanwhile we are determined to keep disarmament high on our agenda-to make an intensified effort to develop acceptable political and technical alternatives to the present arms race. To this end I shall send to the Congress a measure to establish a strengthened and enlarged disarmament agency.68

Finally, if we are to win the battle that is now going on around the world between freedom and tyranny, the dramatic achievements in

65

This redesignation was effected by Public Law 87-296, approved Sept. 22, 1961; 75 Stat. 630.

66

See title I of Public Law 87-141, approved Aug. 17, 1961; 75 Stat. 342. 67 See the unnumbered title, post, p. 1128.

68 See post, doc. 549.

« PreviousContinue »