Ask the Scholar

Page 6 of 12
I can add historical knowledge about this page.

Page image

Page 6

OCR

(Synopsis A, page 6) criticisms that were being made at the time regarding US policy toward China. DGA spoke of how the accusation that the State Department has TRUMAN NATIONAL get no Asian policy "discloses such a depth of ignorance that it is very ANCHOSEON hard to begin to deal with it,' of how "much to the bewildermint which has seized the minds of many of us about recent developments in China Es SERVICE' comes from a failure to understand. (the) basic revolutionary force which is loose in Asia.' The following paragraphs dealt with the controversial defense perimeter: "What is the situation in regard to the military security of the Pacific area and what is our policy in regard to it? "In the first place, the defeat and disarmament of Japan has placed upon the US the necessity of assuming the military defense of Japan so long as that is r equired, both in the interest of our security and in the interests of the security of the entire Pacific area and in all honor in the interest of Japanese security. We have American and there are Australian troops in Japan. I am not in a position fo speak for the Australians but I can assure you that there is no in- tention of any sort of abandoning or weakening the defenses of Japan and that whatever arrangements are to be made, either through permanent settlement or otherwise, that defense must and shall be maintained. "This defensive perimeter runs along the Aleutians to Japan and then goes to the Ryukyus. We hold important defense positions in the Ryukyu Islands and these we will continue to hold. In the interest of the polulation of the Ryukyu Islands, we will at an appropriate time offer to hold these islands under trusteeship of the UN. But they are essential parts of the defensive perimeter of the Pacific and they must and will be held. "The defensive perimeter runs from the Ryukyus to the Philippine Islands. Our relations, our defensive relations wi th the Philippines, are contained in agreements between us. Those agreements are being loyally carried out and will be loyally carried out. Both peoples have learned by bitter experience the vital connections between our mutual defense requirements. We are in no doubt about that and it is hardly necessary for me to say an attack on the Philippines could not and would not be tolerated by the US. But I hasten to add that no one perceives the imminence of any such attack. "So far as the military security of other areas in the Pacific is concerned, it must be clear that no person can guarantee these areas against military attack. But it must also be clear that such a guaranty is hardly sensible or necessary within the realm of practical relationship. "Should such an attack occur---one hesitates to say where such an armed attack could come from---the initial reliance must be on the people attacked to resist it and them upon the ommitments of the entire civilized world under the Charter of the UN which so far has not proved a weak reed to lean on by any people who are determined to protect their independence against outside aggression." DGA then went on to warn that it would be a mistake "to become obsessed with military considerations. " He pointed out that other problems arising out of the 'susceptibility of many areas and many

Page data

Page
6
Source index
0
Type
photo
Media ID
caa79b3a838b2219
Size
unknown

Document data

ID
75848908
Core
doc
Type
document
DTO data
{
    "id": "75848908",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75848908",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Synopsis A, Korea - Developments Prior to Mid-1950",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75848908",
    "collections": [
        "Dean Acheson Papers",
        "Princeton Seminars Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/653115/1722151-02-01.jpg",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/653115/1722151-02-01.jpg",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/653115/1722151-02-01.jpg",
    "imageCount": 12,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

Context sent to Scholar

Document identity
{
    "localId": "75848908",
    "label": "Synopsis A, Korea - Developments Prior to Mid-1950",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75848908"
}
Document source metadata
{
    "id": "75848908",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75848908",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "Synopsis A, Korea - Developments Prior to Mid-1950",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75848908",
    "collections": [
        "Dean Acheson Papers",
        "Princeton Seminars Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/653115/1722151-02-01.jpg",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/653115/1722151-02-01.jpg",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/653115/1722151-02-01.jpg",
    "imageCount": 12,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/75848908",
    "naId": 75848908,
    "levelOfDescription": "item",
    "productionDates": [
        {
            "logicalDate": "1953-01-01",
            "year": 1953
        }
    ],
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
    "seq": 6,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "photo",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/653115/1722151-02-06.jpg",
    "mediaId": "caa79b3a838b2219",
    "ocrText": "(Synopsis A, page 6)\ncriticisms that were being made at the time regarding US policy toward\nChina. DGA spoke of how the accusation that the State Department has\nTRUMAN\nNATIONAL get\nno Asian policy \"discloses such a depth of ignorance that it is very\nANCHOSEON\nhard to begin to deal with it,' of how \"much to the bewildermint which\nhas seized the minds of many of us about recent developments in China\nEs\nSERVICE'\ncomes from a failure to understand. (the) basic revolutionary force\nwhich is loose in Asia.'\nThe following paragraphs dealt with the controversial defense perimeter:\n\"What is the situation in regard to the military security of the\nPacific area and what is our policy in regard to it?\n\"In the first place, the defeat and disarmament of Japan has placed\nupon the US the necessity of assuming the military defense of Japan\nso long as that is r equired, both in the interest of our security and\nin the interests of the security of the entire Pacific area and in\nall honor in the interest of Japanese security. We have American\nand there are Australian troops in Japan. I am not in a position fo\nspeak for the Australians but I can assure you that there is no in-\ntention of any sort of abandoning or weakening the defenses of Japan\nand that whatever arrangements are to be made, either through permanent\nsettlement or otherwise, that defense must and shall be maintained.\n\"This defensive perimeter runs along the Aleutians to Japan and then\ngoes to the Ryukyus. We hold important defense positions in the\nRyukyu Islands and these we will continue to hold. In the interest\nof the polulation of the Ryukyu Islands, we will at an appropriate\ntime offer to hold these islands under trusteeship of the UN. But\nthey are essential parts of the defensive perimeter of the Pacific\nand they must and will be held.\n\"The defensive perimeter runs from the Ryukyus to the Philippine\nIslands. Our relations, our defensive relations wi th the Philippines,\nare contained in agreements between us. Those agreements are being\nloyally carried out and will be loyally carried out. Both peoples\nhave learned by bitter experience the vital connections between our\nmutual defense requirements. We are in no doubt about that and it is\nhardly necessary for me to say an attack on the Philippines could\nnot and would not be tolerated by the US. But I hasten to add that\nno one perceives the imminence of any such attack.\n\"So far as the military security of other areas in the Pacific is\nconcerned, it must be clear that no person can guarantee these areas\nagainst military attack. But it must also be clear that such a\nguaranty is hardly sensible or necessary within the realm of practical\nrelationship.\n\"Should such an attack occur---one hesitates to say where such an\narmed attack could come from---the initial reliance must be on the\npeople attacked to resist it and them upon the ommitments of the\nentire civilized world under the Charter of the UN which so far has\nnot proved a weak reed to lean on by any people who are determined\nto protect their independence against outside aggression.\"\nDGA then went on to warn that it would be a mistake \"to become\nobsessed with military considerations. \" He pointed out that other\nproblems arising out of the 'susceptibility of many areas and many"
}