State of the Union | Page 3

as fighting men and their
eagerness to take a greater share in the defense of their homeland.
Organization, equipment, and training will allow them to do so.
Increased assistance to Korea for this purpose conforms fully to our
global policies.
In June 1950, following the aggressive attack on the Republic of Korea,
the United States Seventh Fleet was instructed both to prevent attack
upon Formosa and also to insure that Formosa should not be used as a
base of operations against the Chinese Communist mainland.
This has meant, in effect, that the United States Navy was required to
serve as a defensive arm of Communist China. Regardless of the
situation in 1950, since the date of that order the Chinese Communists
have invaded Korea to attack the United Nations forces there. They
have consistently rejected the proposals of the United Nations
Command for an armistice. They recently joined with Soviet Russia in
rejecting the armistice proposal sponsored in the United Nations by the
Government of India. This proposal had been accepted by the United
States and 53 other nations.
Consequently there is no longer any logic or sense in a condition that
required the United States Navy to assume defensive responsibilities on
behalf of the Chinese Communists, thus permitting those Communists,
with greater impunity, to kill our soldiers and those of our United
Nations allies in Korea.
I am, therefore, issuing instructions that the Seventh Fleet no longer be
employed to shield Communist China. This order implies no aggressive
intent on our part. But we certainly have no obligation to protect a
nation fighting us in Korea. IV.
Our labor for peace in Korea and in the world imperatively demands
the maintenance by the United States of a strong fighting service ready
for any contingency.
Our problem is to achieve adequate military strength within the limits
of endurable strain upon our economy. To amass military power
without regard to our economic capacity would be to defend ourselves
against one kind of disaster by inviting another.
Both military and economic objectives demand a single national
military policy, proper coordination of our armed services, and

effective consolidation of certain logistics activities.
We must eliminate waste and duplication of effort in the armed
services.
We must realize clearly that size alone is not sufficient. The biggest
force is not necessarily the best--and we want the best.
We must not let traditions or habits of the past stand in the way of
developing an efficient military force. All members of our forces must
be ever mindful that they serve under a single flag and for a single
cause.
We must effectively integrate our armament programs and plan them in
such careful relation to our industrial facilities that we assure the best
use of our manpower and our materials.
Because of the complex technical nature of our military organization
and because of the security reasons involved, the Secretary of Defense
must take the initiative and assume the responsibility for developing
plans to give our Nation maximum safety at minimum cost.
Accordingly, the new Secretary of Defense and his civilian and military
associates will, in the future, recommend such changes in present laws
affecting our defense activities as may be necessary to clarify
responsibilities and improve the total effectiveness of our defense
effort.
This effort must always conform to policies laid down in the National
Security Council.
The statutory function of the National Security Council is to assist the
President in the formulation and coordination of significant domestic,
foreign, and military policies required for the security of the Nation. In
these days of tension it is essential that this central body have the
vitality to perform effectively its statutory role. I propose to see that it
does so.
Careful formulation of policies must be followed by clear
understanding of them by all peoples. A related need, therefore, is to
make more effective all activities of the Government related to
international information.
I have recently appointed a committee of representative and informed
citizens to survey this subject and to make recommendations in the near
future for legislative, administrative, or other action.
A unified and dynamic effort in this whole field is essential to the

security of the United States and of the other peoples in the community
of free nations. There is but one sure way to avoid total war--and that is
to win the cold war.
While retaliatory power is one strong deterrent to a would-be aggressor,
another powerful deterrent is defensive power. No enemy is likely to
attempt an attack foredoomed to failure.
Because the building of a completely impenetrable defense against
attack is still not possible, total defensive strength must include civil
defense preparedness. Because we have incontrovertible evidence that
Soviet Russia possesses atomic weapons, this kind of protection
becomes sheer necessity.
Civil defense responsibilities primarily