THE MILITARY SITUATION IN THE FAR EAST Report of certain members of the Joint Armed Services and Foreign Relations Committee of the United States Senate (Pursuant to unanimous consent agreement of the Senate, April 25, 1951) PREAMBLE For 7 weeks ending June 27, 1951, the Senate Armed Services Committee, acting jointly with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, conducted a searching inquiry into the military situation in the Far East and the circumstances surrounding the recall of Gen. Douglas MacArthur. As a result of this investigation we, members of the joint committee, have established certain facts. We have reached definite conclusions. Believing that we have a clear responsibility to the Nation in this matter, and convinced that the discussion of a cessation of hostilities-in progress at the time of this writing-should not distract attention from fundamental questions in the conduct of our national affairs abroad, we have determined to make our conclusions public. INTRODUCTION The unanimous-consent agreement of the United States Senate was adopted in this way: "Mr. RUSSELL. Mr. President, Gen. Douglas MacArthur has accepted the invitation of the Senate Committee on Armed Services to appear before that committee on May 3. The Senate Committee on Foreign Relations has requested that it be permitted to meet with us in a joint meeting. I ask unanimous consent that that may be done, for the purpose of that meeting as well as subsequent hearings on the subject. "The VICE PRESIDENT. Without objection, it is so ordered. "Mr. WHERRY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield for a question? "Mr. RUSSELL. I yield. "Mr. WHERRY. Is it contemplated that the two committees will sit jointly in continuous meetings? "Mr. RUSSELL. Yes; both for the purpose of hearing General MacArthur, and for the purpose of subsequent hearings to be held on the same subject." Acting upon this unanimous-consent agreement the two committees commenced hearings in executive session on May 3, 1951, and continued the hearings until June 27, 1951. Over 2,000,000 words of testimony were taken from the 13 witnesses who appeared in the following order: General of the Army Douglas MacArthur Secretary of Defense George C. Marshall General of the Army Omar N. Bradley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. J. Lawton Collins, Chief of Staff, United States Army Gen. Hoyt S. Vandenberg, Chief of Staff, United States Air Force Admiral Forrest P. Sherman, Chief of Naval Operations. Dean G. Acheson, Secretary of State Lt. Gen. Albert C. Wedemeyer, United States Army Louis A. Johnson, former Secretary of Defense Vice Adm. Oscar C. Badger, United States Navy Maj. Gen. Patrick J. Hurley, Honorary Reserve, United States Army Maj. Gen. David C. Barr, United States Army 1 Congressional Record, April 25, 1951, p. 4434. In addition to the oral testimony, numerous statements and communications were received, examined, and made a part of the record. At the conclusion of the hearings, on June 28, 1951, Chairman Russell, with the unanimous consent of both committees, issued a declaration of principles. This brief statement defended the necessity for the inquiry and the manner in which the committees had carried out their task. The chairman reiterated his conviction that a frank discussion of differences of opinion concerning the far eastern military situation would strengthen the unity of purpose of our people. He assured the nations of the free world that the objectives of the United States were not shaken by the "MacArthur controversy. He concluded by warning the Communist world that such frank discussions of policy disagreements were a part of the democratic process, adding strength and not weakness to our "relentless quest for our ultimate security." So far this is the only statement given to the Nation following the long and extensive inquiry. 2 We cannot rest at this point. Numerous significant facts were developed as a result of the investigation. We believe that the Nation is entitled to a summation of these facts and an analysis of them. Such materials are presented in the pages following. They consist of— I. The legislative background of the inquiry. II. A brief chronology of the significant events preceding the inquiry. III. A brief commentary concerning the witnesses appearing before the committee. IV. Areas of agreement (those significant facts which were conclusively proved and are not subject to serious disagreement). V. Areas of disagreement (those significant facts which were proved to the satisfaction of the signers of this report). VI. Conclusions. PART I. LEGISLATIVE BACKGROUND OF THIS INQUIRY At 1 a. m., eastern standard time, on April 10, 1951, President Truman released the following message which he had sent relieving General MacArthur as supreme commander, Allied Powers; commander in chief, United Nations Command; commander in chief, Far East; and commanding general, United States Army, Far East: "I deeply regret that it becomes my duty as President and Commander in Chief of the United States military forces to replace you as supreme commander, Allied powers; commander in chief, United Nations Command; commander in chief, Far East; and commanding general, United States Army, Far East. "You will turn over your commands, effective at once, to Lt. Gen. Matthew B. Ridgway. You are authorized to have issued such orders as are necessary to complete desired travel to such place as you select. "My reasons for your replacement will be made public concurrently with the delivery to you of the foregoing order, and are contained in the next following message. 993 Simultaneously with the release of the message, the President issued the following statement: "With deep regret I have concluded that General of the Army Douglas MacArthur is unable to give his wholehearted support to the policies of the United States Government and of the United Nations in matters pertaining to his official duties. In view of the specific responsibilities imposed upon me by the Constitution of the United States and the added responsibility which has been entrusted to me by the United Nations, I have decided that I must make a change of command in the Far East. I have, therefore, relieved General MacArthur of his commands and have designated Lt. Gen. Matthew B. Ridgway as his successor. "Full and vigorous debate on matters of national policy is a vital element in the constitutional system of our free democracy. It is fundamental, however, that military commanders must be governed by the policies and directives issued to them in the manner provided by our laws and Constitution. In time of crisis, this consideration is particularly compelling. 2 Press release, Joint Armed Services-Foreign Relations Committee, June 28, 1951. 3 Compilation of certain published information on the military situation in the Far East. Senate Committee on Armed Services and the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, 1951, hereafter referred to as "Compilation," p. 188. "General MacArthur's place in history as one of our greatest commanders is fully established. The Nation owes him a debt of gratitude for this distinguished and exceptional service which' he has rendered his country in posts of great responsibility. For that reason I repeat my regret at the necessity for the action I feel compelled to take in his case."4 In order that the United Nations be officially informed of this development, on April 11, 1951, Ambassador Austin addressed a letter to Secretary-General Trygve Lie, in which he stated: "Acting under instructions from my Government, I have the honor to inform the Security Council that the President of the United States has today relieved Gen. Douglas MacArthur as the commanding general of the military forces which the members of the United Nations have made available to the unified command under the United States, pursuant to the Security Council resolution of July 7, 1950, and has designated Lt. Gen. Matthew B. Ridgway as his successor." 994 On the same evening the President defended his course of action in a radio address to the American people. That this abrupt action on the part of the President shocked the American people was evidenced by the hundreds of thousands of letters, telegrams, and phone calls which poured into the offices of the Congressmen and Senators in Washington. The reaction of the American people was swiftly transmitted to the floor of the United States Senate, where in rapid succession the following legislative action occurred: 1. Wherry resolution The dismissal of General MacArthur resulted on Wednesday, April 11, in a series of protests on the floor of the United States Senate. Minority Leader Kenneth Wherry, of Nebraska, introduced Senate Concurrent Resolution 24, stating that the dismissal of General MacArthur had "precipitated a situation fraught with danger to the national defense," ," and indicating that the dismissal had "struck a blow to the national unity." Senator Wherry's resolution highly praised General MacArthur and expressed the will of the Senate that the general "be hereby invited to present his views and recommendations for policies and courses in Korea and Asia generally to a joint session of the Senate and House of Representatives." " 6 2. Armed Services Committee 996 On Friday, April 13, acting on a prior request of Senator Styles Bridges (Republican, New Hampshire), the Senate Armed Services Committee in executive session, voted unanimously to conduct an inquiry into the facts surrounding the relief of General MacArthur. 3. Ferguson resolution During succeeding days, additional addresses of protest against the President's action were made on the floor of the Senate. On April 17, Senator Homer Ferguson (Republican, Michigan) introduced Senate Concurrent Resolution 25 the purpose of which was to set up a joint bipartisan committee of 24 Members of the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States "to gather such data, to conduct such interviews, to take such testimony and to hold such hearings as it may determine necessary for a complete evaluation of the United States policies in the Far East and their relation to the foreign and military policies of the United States as a whole." " The joint committee was to consist of 12 Members of the Senate, including two members of each party from the Foreign Relations, Appropriations, and Armed Services Committees, with similar representation from the counterpart coinmittees of the House of Representatives. Immediately after the introduction of Senator Ferguson's resolution, Senator Richard Russell (Democrat, Georgia) stated that "the Senate Committee on Armed Services which I should think, under section 134 (a) of the legislative reorganization law, has primary jurisdiction in this field, has already held a meeting on the subject." He stated that "the committee unanimously agreed-which means that all the members of the committee who were present agreed--and we had a very full attendance of members from both parties, that the Senate Committee on Armed Services should conduct an inquiry into all the facts and circumstances surrounding the recent events in the Far East that have stirred the American people so deeply."" Senator Russell added that pursuant to that unanimous agreement he had "communicated with General MacArthur and requested his appearance before the committee. The general has accepted the invitation, although the time and place of the meetings have not yet been designated." " 4. Foreign Relations Committee Senator Russell indicated that the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, Senator Tom Connally (Democrat, Texas), had called him that morning and suggested there be a joint meeting of the two committees on that issue. Senator Connally had indicated, said Senator Russell, that "inasmuch as the Committee on Armed Services had already inaugurated this inquiry, he thought it would be appropriate for (Senator Russell) to preside over the joint meeting of the committee." " Senator Russell indicated that he would take up that request with the Armed Services Committee. Senator Russell indicated further that his committee had already requested the presence of the Secretary of Defense before the Armed Services Committee on the following day, Wednesday, April 18, but in view of the fact that General MacArthur was to appear on Thursday (April 19) before the Congress and also in view of the fact that "complications have arisen through the submission of the concurrent resolution of the Senator from Michigan"' Senator Russell was going to postpone until a later date Secretary of Defense Marshall's testimony. Senator Ferguson stated that the purpose of his concurrent resolution was to "broaden the base of the investigation so that the people back home would know that the subject had been gone into thoroughly by a fully representative committee of the legislative branch, specifically created for the purpose of enlightening the public on this single but highly important question." Late that day, the Senate agreed by unanimous consent that after convening on Thursday the Senate would stand in recess to attend a joint meeting with the House, to hear an address by General MacArthur. Thereupon, by unanimous consent, Senator Wherry's Senate Concurrent Resolution 24 was tabled. 5. MacArthur address On Thursday, April 19, the Senate and House met in joint session to hear the address by General MacArthur." 6. Consent for joint hearing On April 25, Senator Russell asked unanimous consent for the purpose of holding Joint Foreign Relation-Armed Services Committee hearings to hear General MacArthur and consent was granted.12 7. The fight for open hearings 12 On April 30 the joint committee of the Armed Services and Foreign Relations met and after considerable debate decided by a vote of 16 to 6 to hold the proposed hearings in executive session.18 On May 3, Senator Arthur V. Watkins (Republican, Utah) introduced Senate Resolution 137 whose purpose was to authorize any Member of the Senate to attend as an observer any hearing or other meeting whether executive or open, held by the Committees on Armed Services and Foreign Relations, in accordance with the order of the Senate of April 25, 1951." That same day the Armed Services and Foreign Relations Committees voted to permit Members of the Senate who were not members of the committees to attend the hearings. 12 Compilation, p. 3. 13 The roll-call vote on the question of closed versus open hearings was as follows: For closed Connally, Byrd, Johnson of Texas, Kefauver, Hunt, Stennis, Long, Russell, Green, McMahon, Fulbright, Sparkman, Gillette, Wiley, Smith of New Jersey, Tobey. For open: Bridges, Saltonstall, Knowland, Hickenlooper, Cain, Flanders. In voting to commerce the hearing in executive session, Senator Smith, Republican, New Jersey, specifically stated that if General MacArthur desired open hearings he should have them. Chairman Russell agreed. 14 Congressional Record, May 3, 1951, p. 4891. Senator Ferguson cited the fact that his concurrent resolution had been ordered to "lie on the table," and that it could not be brought up for action until there was an adjournment of the Senate. Senator Wherry moved that the Senate adjourn until 5 p. m., that day, and his motion was agreed to by a vote of 43 yeas to 41 nays. Senator Wherry contended, however, that the issue was worthy of a clear-cut decision by the full Senate. The Senate on May 4, defeated by 37 yeas to 40 nays Senator Wherry's motion to take up Senate Resolution 137. The defeat of Senate Resolution 137 by the margin of three votes culminated an unsuccessful floor fight to force open public hearings. Proponents of the cpen hearings argued that public interest in the issues transcended in importance the remote possibility that vital information might be furnished the enemy through errors in judgment or a slip of the tongue. Opponents of open hearings, led by Senator Russell, contended that security considerations demanded closed hearings. After defeating Senate Resolution 137, the majority devised a unique system of supplying transcripts to the press. Before the press received the transcript it was submitted to Vice Adm. Arthur C. Davis, United States Navy, and Adrian Fisher, Legal Adviser to the State Department. They deleted all information which in their opinion would adversely effect the security of our Nation. The joint committee maintained the right to supervise and to question and reinsert, if desired, any material which was deleted in this fashion. The system made the approved transcript available to the public approximately 2 hours after the appearance of each witness. PART II. CHRONOLOGY OF IMPORTANT EVENTS With the commencement of the actual hearings, there began a review of the events which had preceded the dismissal. The following are some of the most important dates in that connection. 15 February 11, 1945: Yalta agreement." August 14, 1945: Japanese surrender announced by President. September 9, 1945: United States troops formally accepted the surrender of Japanese forces south of the thirty-eighth parallel, and the United States Army military government in Korea was established. November 14, 1947: The UN General Assembly resolved that there should be a free election by secret ballot in Korea and that subsequently all foreign troops should be withdrawn. August 15, 1948: Following the May 10 election held in South Korea under the auspices of the U. N. Temporary Commission, the Government of the Republic of Korea was established with Syngman Rhee as President and Army military government in Korea was terminated. September 9, 1948: The Supreme People's Council in North Korea formally declared the establishment of a Democratic People's Republic of Korea, claiming jurisdiction over the entire country. This government was subsequently recognized by the Soviet Union and her satellite states. April 8, 1949: Russia vetoed the admission of the Korean Republic to the United Nations. July 1, 1949: The United States Army withdrew American occupation forces in accordance with the UN resolution. Only a small contingent numbering 500 officers and men remained to train Korean forces. August 1, 1949: China white paper issued by State Department. January 5, 1950: President Truman announces no further arms aid to the Republic of China or Formosa. June 25, 1950: North Korean Communist forces attacked South Korean defense positions south of the thirty-eighth parallel. The UN Security Council at 5: 45 p. m. that day adopted a resolution by a vote of 9 to 0 (Yugoslavia abstaining and the U. S. S. R. absent) calling for an immediate cease-fire and withdrawal of North Korean forces to the thirty-eighth parallel. All members were requested to "* render every assistance to the United Nations in the execution of this resolution and to refrain from giving assistance to the North Korean authorities." * * 16 |