Document I-10 "One of the Most Solemn Responsibilities of the President . Tonight I want to talk to you about one of the most solemn responsibilities of the President of the United States, and that is the duty to direct and control the nuclear power of the United States. Nineteen years ago President Truman announced "the force from which the sun draws its power has been loosed." 24 In a single, fiery flash the world as we had known it was forever changed. Into our hands had come much of the responsibility for the life of freedom, for the life of our civilization, and for the life of man on this planet. And the realities of atomic power placed much of that burden in the hands of the President of the United States. Let no one think atomic weapons are simply bigger and more destructive than other weapons; that they are just another development like the airplane or the tank. The total number of Americans killed in battle from the Revolution until tonight is a little over 526,000 people. Today a single nuclear weapon can kill more than 526,000. Our experts tell us as of today that a full-scale nuclear exchange between the East and the West would kill almost 300 million people around the world, and in the midst of that terror and tragedy we could expect that weapon after weapon would soon engulf a portion of mankind. A cloud of deadly radiation would drift and destroy, menacing every living thing on God's earth, and in those unimaginable hours unborn generations would forever be lamed. Now, in the face of these facts, every American President has drawn the same conclusion: President Harry Truman said: "Such a war is not a possible policy for rational man.' President Eisenhower said: "In a nuclear war, there can be no victory-only losers." President Kennedy said: "Total war makes no sense. . . ." And I say that we must learn to live with each other or we will destroy each other. Many forces have converged to make the modern world. Atomic power is very high among those forces, but what has the atomic age meant for those of us who have come here to this dinner tonight? It means, I think, that we have a unique responsibility, unique in history, for the defense of freedom. Our nuclear power alone has deterred Soviet aggression. Under the shadow of our strength, our friends have kept their freedom and have built their nations. Public Papers of the Presidents of the United States: Lyndon B. Johnson, 1963-64, vol. II, pp. 1078-1081. "Ibid., Harry S. Truman, 1945, pp. 197-200. It means that we can no longer wait for the tides of conflict to touch our shores. It means that great powers can never again delude themselves into thinking that war will be painless or that victory will be easy. Thus, atomic power creates urgent pressure for peaceful settlements, and for the strengthening of the United Nations. It means a change must come in the life of nations. Man has fought since time began, and now it has become clear that the consequences of conflict are greater than any gain, and man just simply must change if man is to survive. For Americans, it means that control over nuclear weapons must be centralized in the hands of the highest and the most responsible officer of government-the President of the United States. He, alone, has been chosen by all the people to lead all the Nation. He, alone, is the constitutional Commander in Chief of the Nation. On his prudence and wisdom alone can rest the decision which can alter or destroy the Nation. First, we have worked to avoid war by accident or miscalculation. I believe the American people should know the steps that we have taken to eliminate the danger of accidental attack by our strategic forces, and I am going to talk about that tonight. The release of nuclear weapons would come by Presidential decision alone. Complex codes and electronic devices prevent any unauthorized action. Every further step along the way-from decision to destruction is governed by the two-man rule. Two or more men must act independently and must decide the order has been given. They must independently take action. An elaborate system of checks and counter-checks, procedural and mechanical, guard against any unauthorized nuclear bursts. In addition, since 1961 we have placed permissive action links on several of our weapons. These are electromechanical locks which must be opened by secret combination before any action at all is possible, and we are extending this system. We have also worked to avoid war by miscalculation. There may be little time for decision between our first warning and our need to reply. If our weapons could be easily destroyed, we would have to make the final decision in a matter of minutes. By protecting our power against surprise attack, we give ourselves more time to confirm that war has actually begun. Thus, we have placed missiles in protected, underground sites. We have placed missiles beneath the seas. And we have provided constant and secure communication between strategic forces and the Commander in Chief, the President of the United States. I do not want us to fight a war that no one ever meant to begin. We have worked to limit the spread of nuclear weapons. The dignity and the interest of our allies demands that they share nuclear responsibility, and we have proposed such measures. The secrets of the atom are known to many people. No single nation can forever prevent their use. If effective arms control is not achieved, we may see the day when these frightful, fearful weapons are in the hands of many nations. Their concern and capacity for control may be more limited than our own. So our work against nuclear spread must go on. Third, we have developed ways to meet force with appropriate force by expanding and modernizing our conventional forces. We have increased our ground forces. We have increased our tactical air force. We have increased our airlift. We have increased our stock of the most modern weapons. Thus, we do not need to use nuclear power to solve every problem. We will not let our might make the United States musclebound. Fourth, we have worked to damp down disputes and to contain conflict. In an atomic world, any spark might ignite the bonfire. Thus our responses are firm but measured. We saw an example of that in the Tonkin Gulf just a few days ago.25 Thus we pursue peaceful settlements in many remote corners of the globe. Fifth, we constantly work toward arms control. A test ban agreement has ended atmospheric explosions which were poisoning the atmosphere.26 We have established a "hot line" for instant communication between the United States and Moscow in case of any crisis.27 As President, I ordered a cutback of unnecessary nuclear production,28 and this year we submitted several major new proposals to the disarmament conference in Geneva.29 I will pursue with vigor all of those proposals. These are only first steps. But they point the way toward the ultimate elimination of ultimate destruction. Document I-11 "We Are Trying To Help Build a Community of Free and Independent Nations": ADDRESS BY THE COUNSELOR AND CHAIRMAN OF THE POLICY PLANNING COUNCIL (ROSTOW), DEPARTMENT OF STATE, BEFORE THE INSTITUTE OF NORTH AMERICAN STUDIES, BARCELONA, SPAIN, OCTOBER 6, 1964 (EXCERPT) 30 I should like to do two things: first, to outline in broad terms how we in Washington define the strategy we pursue on the world. scene; second, to look in somewhat greater detail at one dimension See post, docs. IX-127 et seq. *Text in American Foreign Policy: Current Documents, 1963, pp. 1032-1034. "See ibid., pp. 522–523. See post, docs. X-4, 9, and 17 et seq. "See post, docs. X-4, 6, 8-9, 16, 20, 28-29. 30 Department of State Bulletin, Nov. 2, 1964, pp. 637–642. of that strategy-that part which is concerned with the relations between the more advanced part of the free world, lying mainly in the northern arc between Tokyo and West Berlin, and developing nations, mainly to the south, in Asia, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America. Although the headlines are filled with news of crisis, and although the first duty of all our governments is to cope with such crises, a workable strategy in the contemporary world must begin by defining the fundamental forces which we confront in the second half of the 20th century and which we must try constructively to shape. These fundamental forces can be defined under the following major headings: -The revolution in military technology, yielding a virtually uncontrolled competitive arms race and, at present, an imbalance of the offensive over the defensive in the field of nuclear weapons; -The revolution of modernization in Latin America, Africa, Asia, and the Middle East, including the modernization going forward in underdeveloped areas under Communist control; -The revival of economic momentum and political strength in Western Europe and Japan; -The revolution in science and technology, notably in international communications; -The paradoxical political revolution, marked simultaneously by the proliferation of ardent new nations and, at the same time, an intensified interdependence which requires the individual nation-state to cooperate increasingly with others in order to provide for its security and economic welfare; -The continuing compulsive commitment of the Communists to extend their power on the world scene to the maximum, by exploiting these fundamental forces. In the light of this view of what we confront in the world around us, the strategy of the United States may be defined as follows: First, we are strengthening the bonds of association among the more industrialized nations which lie mainly in the northern portion of the free world: Western Europe, Canada, and Japan. Western Europe and Japan have been caught up in a remarkable phase of postwar recovery and economic growth, a phenomenon especially observable here in Barcelona. American military strength and American economic resources have served to protect and support Western Europe and Japan. Although they must still rely on the deterrent power of American nuclear resources, they are evidently entering a phase where they wish to play a larger role on the world scene and they command the resources to do so. We are in the midst of a complicated process of working out new terms of partnership with Western Europe in every dimension. NATO is being rethought and Europe's role within it being redefined, in the light of the changing, more diverse and sophisticated nature of the Communist threat. New patterns of trade are being worked out within Europe, between Europe and the United States, between the whole Atlantic community and the rest of the world. Our policies with respect to economic growth and currency reserves are being discussed and alined in the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development; and we are moving into a new partnership in the business of aid to the underdeveloped areas. Although Japan stands in a somewhat different relation to us than does Europe with respect to military affairs, in each of the other dimensions of alliance policy-trade, reserves, and aid—it is moving into a role of partnership with the industrialized north. Let me make one point quite bluntly. We do not envisage this association of the northern, more industrialized states as either an exclusive club or one designed to protect the narrow interests of those who join in its enterprises. Quite the contrary. It is an effort to group the assets these nations command and to generate global policies which will not merely protect the free-world community but provide to the southern continents resources and trading opportunities which will accelerate their development and draw them as soon as may be feasible into full partnership on the world scene. The constructive steps that mark this process of tightening the north and of mobilizing its strength and resources for worldwide tasks do not usually make headlines unless-as is inevitable-there are phases of disagreement along the way; but it is a rapidly developing piece of history which will give to the cause of freedom a new strength, a new bone structure. The second dimension of our strategy concerns our posture toward the revolution of modernization going forward in Latin America, Africa, Asia, and the Middle East-all areas where Spain has had much experience. What we sometimes call underdeveloped nations represent a wide spectrum with different problems marking each stage along the road to self-sustained growth. Some of these nations are well along that road; others are just beginning. And, in the end, each nation, like each individual, is, in an important sense, unique. What is common throughout these regions is that men and women are determined to bring to bear what modern science and technology can afford in order to elevate the standards of life of their peoples and to provide a firm basis for positions of national dignity and independence on the world scene. The United States is firmly committed to support this effort. We look forward to the emergence of strong, self-confident nations which, out of their own traditions and aspirations, create their own forms of modern society. We take it as our duty-and our interest-to help maintain the integrity and the independence of this vast modernization process, in as far as our resources and our ability to influence the course of events permit. Working increasingly in partnership with our friends in Europe and Japan, our objective is to see emerge a new relation of north-south cooperation among self-respecting, sovereign nations to supplant the |