Foreign Relations of the United States, 1961–1963, Volume XV, Berlin Crisis, 1962–1963

79. Memorandum for the Record⁰

Washington, July 19, 1962.

SUBJECT

• Meeting with the President on Berlin Planning, 1000 hours, 19 July 1962

1. At 1000 hours, July 19, 1962, the President met with representatives of State-Defense-JCS-the White House staff, in order to consider approval of a US position on BERCON/MARCON contingency planning concerning Berlin, specifically BQD–M–27 dated 12 July 1962 and its enclosure.¹ What follows is the result of an informal debriefing by General Taylor. Among others who attended were Secretaries Rusk and McNamara, Assistant Secretaries Kohler and Nitze, Generals Lemnitzer and Gray, and Messrs. Bundy and Klein.

• “(1) There is a compelling necessity for the Allies to succeed in protecting their vital interests relating to Berlin and to ensure that this success is recognized in the Free World.
• “(2) The purpose of Allied operation, however, should not be to overpower the Soviet Union or to disintegrate the Satellite area, but to make the Soviet Government change their policy on Berlin. Therefore, the Allies should give the Soviet Union opportunity to draw back and even (without creating the appearance of failure on our part) help them to cover up this retreat.” (Ibid., President’s Office Files, NATO General)

On July 24 Bundy sent Rusk and McNamara a memorandum in which he stated that the President approved the general position taken in their joint memorandum and the specific recommendation that U.S. contingency plans for Berlin be discussed with NATO. (Department of State, Central Files, 762.00/7–2462)

2. The discussion did not proceed in a particularly orderly manner and it was only with some difficulty that Mr. Nitze was eventually able to direct the attention of the meeting to its constituted purpose of discussing and approving the BERCON/MARCON planning positions embodied in BQD–M–27. He was eventually, however, able to do this and the President has given his approval to the paper.

3. In general, the apparent impression conveyed to the President by the extensive discussion was that months would be required before any substantial operative plans came into existence, that not very much had been accomplished with our Allies—especially at NATO level since last year, and that a great deal of time seemed to have been expended on planning for unlikely contingencies. Although the meeting was not supposed to address the subject of a separate peace treaty until after the consideration of BERCONs/MARCONs, the President’s early questions apparently brought this subject into the arena right away. Secretary Rusk reported the fact of many agreed papers, draft notes and announcements, etc. He also said that when in Europe later this week he would propose to the other Quadripartite Foreign Ministers the advisability of reviewing their contingency plans for a separate peace treaty in the light of developments during the past several months; he also thought that it might now be appropriate to encourage the French to return actively into the Berlin planning forum. The President’s questions brought out the fact that there did not exist any genuine counterproposal for action in the event of a separate peace treaty, but rather only plans for using selected mechanics designed to accommodate to the separate treaty. The President strongly felt that the Western reaction to a separate peace treaty should not be such as to imply great concern over the treaty (this, of course, is in fact the sense of the agreed Allied position).

4. After the above early discussion, Mr. Nitze proceeded to outline briefly and generally the place of the BERCONs/MARCONs in over-all Berlin planning. General Lemnitzer then followed, as planned, with a useful explanation of the specific BERCONs and MARCONs proposed for approval, but the President kept intervening with questions. In answer to one of them, General Gray said that on his recent trip to Europe he had discovered the BERCON planning activity had not yet even descended to the level of Armies, and that therefore some months would undoubtedly be required before fully prepared operational plans would be available up and down the entire line.

5. At one point in the discussion the briefers mentioned that the Allies, including the United States, would enter into some mobilization activity. The President thereupon asked what the US plan was for mobilizing whom on what time schedule, but no ready answer was forthcoming from the group.

6. Comment. It would seem that the President never clearly understood the exact place occupied by the BERCON/MARCON plans in the over-all picture of Berlin contingency planning which may be said to begin with certain unilateral plans, proceed through tripartite and quadripartite agreed plans or catalogues of plans, and feed at some point into the full context of NATO plans and catalogues of plans. The one basic Berlin planning “Bible” with which the President is, or at least was at one time, reasonably familiar is the so-called “Poodle Blanket”² with its four preferred phases or sequences. A review of this Poodle Blanket, highlighted by a demonstration of how, where and when the BERCONs and MARCONs fit into it, would almost surely have led to greater understanding by the President and therefore a more orderly consideration of the paper which formed the subject of the meeting.

LJL

0. Source: National Defense University, Taylor Papers, Box 38, 506 Bercon/Marcon. Secret. Drafted by Legere. Klein’s notes on this meeting are in the Kennedy Library, National Security Files, Germany, Berlin.
1. On July 16 Rusk and McNamara had sent the President a joint memorandum outlining the status of Berlin contingency (BERCON) and maritime contingency (MARCON) planning and the steps needed to coordinate this planning with NATO. Attached to this memorandum was BQD–M–27, “Report to Washington Ambassadorial Group on Politico-Military Consultation on Bercon/Marcon Plans.” In describing the Western aims in a Berlin crisis this paper stated:
2. For text of NSAM No. 109 (U.S. Policy on Military Actions in a Berlin Crisis, “Poodle Blanket”), October 23, 1961, see vol. XIV, Document 185.