Department of State Disarmament Files
The Secretary of Defense (Forrestal) to the Secretary of State 1
Dear Mr. Secretary: In compliance with the request of the Joint Chiefs of Staff I am forwarding herewith their comments on the Draft Proposal for the Armaments Regulation Program:
“By memorandum dated 6 [5] August 1947 the Executive Committee on Regulation of Aramaments forwarded to the Joint Chiefs of Staff ten copies of a ‘Draft Proposal for Armaments Regulation Program’ and requested the Joint Chiefs of Staff to examine this proposal from the military point of view and give the Executive Committee on Regulation of Armaments the benefit of their views.2 Except for the element of timing of presentation as proposed by Mr. Bard, the Joint Chiefs of Staff perceive no objection to the ‘Draft Proposal’ from the military point of view.
“The Joint Chiefs of Staff consider it to be of overriding importance to the future security of the United States that an international system, acceptable to the United States, be devised and accepted by all nations which will prevent any nation’s secretly building up weapons of mass destruction to the extent which will permit it to undertake general aggressive warfare. The United States (Baruch) plan for the international control of atomic energy is the only proposal publicly advanced to date which the Joint Chiefs of Staff believe would, if mutually agreed to by all nations, adequately safeguard the future security of the United States. This plan contains provisions for detection of violators and evaders and for enforcement of sanctions against such violators or evaders. Acceptance of both of these proposals by all nations is believed by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to be mandatory for our future security.
“The ‘Draft Proposal for Armaments Regulation Program’ does not provide for enforcement of sanctions against violators or evaders of the program. Therefore, the Joint Chiefs of Staff believe that presentation of the Draft Proposal to the Commission before the Commission has reached unanimous agreement on the substantive matters contained in the first three items of its Plan of Work or before the provisions contained in the United States (Baruch) plan for the international control of atomic energy for enforcement of sanctions against violators or evaders have been unanimously accepted by the Atomic Energy Commission and by the Security Council, would establish a United States position prejudicial to the acceptance of the sanctions provisions of the United States (Baruch) plan and would therefore be prejudicial to the future security of the United States. “In consequence, the Joint Chiefs of Staffs recommend against the [Page 680] presentation of the ‘Draft Proposal for Armaments Regulation Program’ until after complete international agreement has been reached on the following items:
- “a. The United States (Baruch) plan for international control of atomic energy and the elimination from national armaments of atomic and all other major weapons of mass destruction, and
- “b. Practical and effective safeguards by means of an international system of control to protect complying states against the hazards of violations and evasions of an international agreement to eliminate, regulate or reduce armaments and armed forces.
“The presentation of the Draft Proposal except in terms of the timing indicated above would, in the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, be dangerously inadvisable for the reason that the future security of the United States would thereby be jeopardized.
“The Joint Chiefs of Staff take this opportunity to reaffirm their support of progressive regulation and reduction of conventional armaments and armed forces consistent with the security of the United States. They therefore offer their assistance to the Department of State in drafting a broad outline of a workable plan for the progressive regulation and reduction of conventional armaments and armed forces to be presented to the Commission for Conventional Armaments when it enters discussion of Item 4 of its Plan of Work.”
Sincerely yours,
- This letter was circulated in the Executive Committee on Regulation of Armaments as RAC D–9/7, October 17. At a meeting of Forrestal, Lovett, and Bard, October 17, the letter was withdrawn, but it served as the basis for subsequent discussions. (Department of State Disarmament Files) Regarding the October 17 meeting, see Blaisdell’s memorandum of that date, p. 685.↩
- The memorandum of transmittal, RAC D–9/6, August 5, is not printed; the draft proposal itself, RAC D–9/1a, July 16, is printed p. 562.↩