quite as many channels to go through now. We are just in the process of getting a new Chief of the Military Mission in Italy, and one in Belgium, and I do not think that it has taken anywhere near the effort you would indicate by your statement. Senator CAIN. General Kibler, I used to understand this problem, sir, thoroughly. Permit me to ask you this question: What channels are no longer required that were required a year ago in getting military personnel for these missions? General KIBLER. Maybe the channels work faster. Senator CAIN. That is to say you still have a number of channels which I pointed out to you a few minutes ago? General KIBLER. I call General Handy on the telephone. General Handy says, "All right, here is a major general who is available. Is he all right?" I said, "We will have to clear it with the Ambassador," which we did in very short order, and I believe the major general is now-this happened about 2 weeks ago-designated and is on the way. Senator CAIN. My concern a year ago when I studied this was not with general officers. The great pity was that general officers were cleared in writing their own letters, because a request had been made 2 or 3 months ago for clerks to act as stenographers, and the generals had shown up, but the clerks were still down in Heidelberg and it was a roadblock of considerable proportions, sir. General KIBLER. That was in the very beginning. There was then resistance, but I think that has pretty much vanished. We are having a little difficulty now with our own departments who are short personnel, on account of Korea and what not. We have a little difficulty there, but I do not think it is so bad. Senator CAIN. You do not think it is so bad, sir, but you have not suggested that it was so good, either, and we are trying to get you adequate equipment and machinery with which to work. (The following additional information was supplied for the record :) PERSONNEL PROCEDURES FOR MILITARY ASSISTANCE ADVISORY GROUPS 1. Military Assistant Advisory Group (MAAG) personnel, both military and civilian, while a separate entity under the command of a military officer of general or flag officer rank, serve as a part of the Ambassador's staff. They are thus accorded certain diplomatic privileges and immunities considered essential for the proper performance of their duties. For this reason, as well as a few early instances of political sensitivity about large numbers of American military personnel which was evidenced by certain countries, it is considered by both the Departments of State and Defense that the Ambassador should be able to influence both the total numbers and the time of arrival of MAAG personnel. The Ambassadors have frequently given valuable political guidance in these matters, particularly when a new MAAG is being established, and no instance is known of any Ambassador-or the Department of State-refusing permission for military personnel considered necessary by the MAAG chief. 2. Initially there was some overcontrol and duplication of communications through State Department channels. This has now been largely eliminated, and the MAAG chief simply includes the Ambassador's concurrence in his request for personnel. State Department no longer keeps detailed records of military personnel but is furnished periodic reports by Defense of the number of military personnel in each MAAG. 3. There are two phases in furnishing MAAG personnel: (1) the approval of a new position, and (2) filling the approved position. Insofar as possible, the MAAG chief anticipates the positions he will need for an entire fiscal year. He fills those positions when the personnel are actually needed. Establishment of a new position usually takes longer in the approval stage than filling the position because the military service desires to study the need of the requested position in the light of the personnel already furnished and the equipment being furnished. Obvious requirements are usually approved within 48 hours. Other requests may require clarification from the MAAG chief, and thus some little time may elapse before the position is approved. The average time for approval of movement of personnel within an approved complement is 48 hours including time required for transmission of the cable. 4. In order that MAAG personnel may serve a full tour of duty, it has been decided that all positions will be filled by personnel from the United States. MAAG personnel are very carefully screened, both for technical and personal qualifications. The time required for this screening, administrative arrangements required to process them (issuance of orders, inoculations, passports, visas, etc.) usually amounts to about 1 month. Whenever possible, military personnel are given 30 days' leave prior to departure for extended oversea duty in order to get their personal affairs in order, make the necessary arrangements for their families and household goods, etc. For reasons of economy, military personnel are sent by Military Sea Transport Service whenever feasible and unless their presence is urgently required. Therefore the time lapse between approval and actual arrival at the post is usually between 2 and 3 months, depending on the length of time required for travel. 5. These usual procedures do not, of course, obtain in cases of emergencies, but emergency cases have become more and more rare as most of the MAAG's have been in operation for well over a year and are able to foresee their personnel needs as they could not at the beginning. EUROPE'S CONTRIBUTION TO DEFENSE Mr. BATT. This morning, particularly Senators Knowland and Lodge, were very interested to know what percentage of the European requirements were being met by the Europeans themselves, today, and did we know of any programs which they had for the future, and the figures would represent the share of the program which they would cover. Now I have that, out of certain secret files, which I would give you as secret data for the record. Do you want me to file that, or should I quickly read those percentages? Have you any interest in hearing them, or would you just like me to file them? Senator SPARKMAN (acting chairman). What is the wish of the committee? Mr. BATT. It will take me about 3 minutes. Senator SPARKMAN (acting chairman). Why don't you read them? As I understand, you feel after they have been read it should be deleted from any published record; is that right? Mr. BATT. Yes, sir; I am sure of that. Senator SPARKMAN (acting chairman). Go ahead and read them. Mr. BATT. Percentage of the 1952 requirements to be filled by these countries themselves, is the first figure. The next figure will be the percentage of the total program which they expect to fill for themselves, and the third figure would be the percentage which they could fill, if there were no shortages of, particularly financing, because raw materials and machine tools will cut across all of these. The third figure then will be primarily a financial limitation. The second figure will be the presently known figure for the total program. The first one will be the 1952 program. I have to point out that this eliminates the British figure, and for two reasons: One, the British are presently engaged in revamping their program to follow the recent arrangements through their Parliament for upping their program from $10 billion to $14 billion. [Deleted.] Senator SPARKMAN. When you say they could do it all if they had financing, is it proposed that we will finance them in those instances, and let them do it all? Is that where this economic aid comes in? Mr. BATT. No; that is such a small percentage of the total which would be involved that the economic aid we are suggesting for 1952 only scratches the edge of that figure. Senator SPARKMAN (acting chairman). Are there any further questions? Senator STENNIS. Mr. Chairman, I want to ask General Olmsted one question, please: General, I believe you said you went down into Italy and spent some time there and have personal knowledge of the situation with reference to their army. MORALE IN THE ITALIAN ARMY I met a young man about a year ago here, a young Italian who is an American citizen, and he spent some time over there, and he told us as a fact that down on the training level where their rations were issued for the recruits, so many to the first lieutenant or captain, that the officer in the Italian Army took about half of those goods for himself and sold them, and the recruit got about half of his rations and other allowances. That impressed me greatly, if it is so. I have thought about that many times. He described it as a basis for the low morale in the army. I have thought about it many times and wondered about it. Could you give us any light on that phase? General OLMSTED. I have never heard that said in the Italian Army. It has been the case in a good many of the Allied forces, where the pay and rations are given to the unit commander and it is hoped that it will filter on down to the soldier. We are not providing any pay or subsistence for any of these armies, so we do not have an occasion to police that sort of thing. However, we would get some reaction, I think, from our training teams who live out in the field with these units and we have had no such report from the Italian forces that are NATO forces. All I can say is that from our people who have been with the training teams on the ground with these units, we have no report from that particular army. Senator STENNIS. Well you are supposed to know about it. You think that that is not true. That is your opinion about it. General OLMSTED. We have no indications it is true in the case of the Italian Army. you Senator STENNIS. You said you felt they would be capable and willing to fight. If they were trained under conditions like that would hardly expect to have much of an army in them, would you? General OLMSTED. Well there is something about a force in the field. You get a feel of it. Of course, your quick look is not as convincing as the report of competent Americans who live with them day in and day out. Not only the quick look that we have an opportunity to take, but the reports of our people who are with them all the time add up to the same conclusion. Senator STENNIS. Well, I think you have shed some light on that subject. Thank you, sir. FORCES NOT COMMITTED TO EISENHOWER Senator CAIN. What forces did you say, General, are not in General Eisenhower's NATO army? General OLMSTED. Well in all the countries there are forces that are not committed to NATO. Now for those forces, we extend no aid. Senator CAIN. I am not certain that you understand me. Are you referring to Spanish forces? General OLMSTED. No; I would say right within Italy, for example, there are the home guards or things of that kind that are not committed. Generally we are only equipping the units that are committed to General Eisenhower's command. Senator CAIN. Thank you. Senator SPARKMAN (acting chairman). Are there any further questions? If not, the committee will stand in recess until 10:30 tomorrow morning. EDITING AND PUBLISHING THE HEARINGS The CHAIRMAN. What is the desire of the committee about publishing this record and before publication having it edited and so forth and so on? Senator SMITH. How about today's questioning of this Board? Mr. WILCOX. The thought was that the procedure could be followed that was followed in the last hearing, with all the material left that could be left and only that deleted which is in the national interest securitywise, and then the record published in that fashion. However, the staff could not go ahead until we knew what the committee wanted to do. We have made no plans, except we have the first 3 days' hearings ready for the printer. We would like to proceed but we must know for sure whether the proposal is approved. The CHAIRMAN. You would have to edit it before it is printed, of course. Mr. WILCOX. That is right, sir. The CHAIRMAN. Do you have enough staff to do it? Mr. WILCOX. We would have to rely to a large extent upon Defense, State Department, and ECA, in order to determine what is the material which they think desirable to release. The CHAIRMAN. What is the will of the committee about that? Senator GREEN. We should have it edited before we take any action. Senator WILEY. I move we edit it and get it printed. The CHAIRMAN. Senator Green, I do not think your thought would be good. They may work their heads off and edit it and then not print it. Senator MCMAHON. If you read it and decided they left out something you wanted to put in, you could have a supplementary reprint. Senator GREEN. On the other hand, you might leave out something that they passed. That was my thought when we brought it up Senator Connally's absence. We said we ought to pass on anything that we thought should not be there even if they passed it. 87360-51-21 Senator MCMAHON. I have a good deal of confidence in Mr. Wilcox, and if he went over it and found anything questionable, he could raise it with us. Senator GREEN. That would be additional editing. That was not mentioned. Mr. WILCOX. Senator, the staff always does a certain amount of editing and any deletions on the part of the executive branch which we think are not justifiable, we always call it to their attention and get it reinserted. The CHAIRMAN. All in favor of the motion say "Aye." Opposed "No." The motion is carried. Senator SPARKMAN. These newspaper people jump on each of us when we go out. I have shifted them to the Chair, myself. The CHAIRMAN. We give out a printed statement and we have given out one today. Senator SPARKMAN. I wondered if it would not be better to make some release after every commitee meeting. The CHAIRMAN. We do in the mornings, but we do not like to make out two in the same day. . Mr. WILCOX. We have a statement prepared for this session. The hearing is adjourned. (Exhibits J through R referred to by Generals Scott and Olmsted were classified.) (Whereupon, at 4: 15 p. m., the hearing was adjourned, to reconvene at 10:30 a. m. Friday, August 3, 1951.) |