[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.(c) The term "Department of the Air Force" as used in this Act shallbe construed to mean the Department of the Air Force at the seat of thegovernment and all field headquarters, forces, reserve components,installations, activities, and functions under the control or supervision ofthe Department of the Air Force.(July 26, 1947, ch.343, title II, §§ 205(c), 206(a), 207(c), 61 Stat.501, 502.)Next | ToC | Prevback to JFK | ratville times | rat haus | Index | SearchNext | ToC | PrevAPPENDIX IIIThe document that follows is one of the most influential documents of thepast quarter-century.It was written and compiled from the work of manynameless and faceless authors within the government and from othersources close to these men in the academic world and the world ofbusiness.It was drafted by an Army General, Richard G.Stilwell, while hewas serving as a member of a special Presidential committee.It includesmuch material written by Air Force General Edward G.Lansdale, amongothers.Its origins come from the depths of a special source reaching farback into the history of the man.Its twentieth-century manifestationoccurs in the Russian Revolution of 1917 and in other revolutions sincethat time.These paramilitary ideas and methods know no ideology and nocreed or code.They are the craft of those who would seek power and ofthose who would fight wars by technical means, and who would utilize themilitary organization of the state to gain that power by influencing theminds of the "elite", by engaging in social, political, economic, and almostincidentally, military activity.As we have said this course of action begins with a high-soundingresolve to improve the lot of the poor "under-developed" nations, using thevehicle of the Military Assistance Program to take over the army of thatcountry.This then is repeated in other countries, as we have seen,becoming evident in recent times in such countries as Greece and Brazil,among others.If this were all that it meant we might be able to treat it lightly asanother evidence of the inherent activity of the "do-gooder" instinct ofWestern man.However, it is only reasonable to see, in this action, theominous fact that it is the American soldier who is the teacher of thisdoctrine; and it is the same American soldier who becomes his ownstudent.Since this action was begun in 1959 tens of thousands -- yes,hundreds of thousands -- of American military men, a whole newgeneration, have grown up believing that this is not only the right thing for"those foreigners" but for Americans as well.The following document begins mildly and almost reasonably.Itgets to the heart of the matter smoothly and without alarm.However, as itbuilds and creates its own crescendo it begins to veer from its scholarlyand well-tempered tone and approaches the type of delivery made famousby such men as Hitler, Mussolini, and Joseph Stalin.When highestofficials of this Government assert that the majority of the nations of theuncommitted "Third World" would be better off under the control of theirmilitary elite, an elite to be selected by Americans, it is time for otherAmericans to read, to listen to, and to sound the warning on the possibilitythat this same American elite may not become persuaded of its own role inthis country.Note that this paper was drafted in May 1959.It was drafted duringthe Eisenhower Administration, and it was a forerunner of suchcatchwords, generally associated with Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, ascounterinsurgency, pacification, special forces, subversive insurgency,and the like.These terms had all been introduced before Kennedy's tenureand were simply awaiting their day in the world of the Secret Team.In keeping with Secret Team practice, this so-called draft wasunclassified so that it could be processed through all sections of the elitewithout control of transmittal or copies.May 15, 1959TRAINING UNDER THE MUTUAL SECURITY PROGRAM(with emphasis on development of leaders)CONTENTSI.IntroductionII.Present PatternIII.New HorizonsIV.Leadership ProgramsNon-Military SectorMilitary SectorV.Development of Indigenous Educational SystemsVI.New Roles for the MilitaryVII.Development of ValuesU.S.Training EnvironmentRole of the AdvisorVIII.Requirements and RecommendationsI -- INTRODUCTIONThe Committee has thus far placed primary stress on defining thequantitative threshold and material guidelines of a continuing mutualsecurity effort.Yet the Committee is mindful -- and indeed so stated intransmitting its Interim Report -- that an adequate United Statescontribution to the security and growth of our Free World associates, andparticularly the less developed countries, involves much more than theprovision of military hardware and economic capital, vital though theseingredients be.The indispensable complement, and a clear third dimensionof United States programs, is the development of requisite institutionalframeworks, managerial organizations and individual talents to effectivelyuse the physical resource inputs.The Committee has had reports, from allquarters, that the severe shortage of trained executives, administrators, andother categories of decision makers is a major impediment to balancedeconomic growth in the less developed areas.It is conscious that armsalone do not an army make; that leadership, collective motivation, andidentification with the aspirations of countrymen are equal determinants ofa military establishment adequate to its tasks and compatible with itsenvironment.It is impressed with the magnitude of the tasks which facethe fledgling nations in the quest for symbols to replace those no longervalid; in the adaptation of cultural heritage to new settings; in thedevelopment of political, social and ideological foundations; and inmeeting today's manpower deficiencies while laying the educational basefor the future.One is impelled to speak out on this subject because the recorddemonstrates that, far from receiving major attention, human resourcesdevelopment has been relegated to secondary importance.II -- THE PRESENT PATTERNAdmittedly, there are impressive statistics as to the numbers of foreignpersonnel who have received training, under auspices of the MutualSecurity Program, in the United States, in their own countries, or in thirdareas.But the concept and the approach have been largely mechanistic.While there has been a measurable shift in the past year, the bulk of ICAtraining programs are still "project-oriented": designed to meet the specificadministrative, technical, and professional skill requirements generated bythe concurrent ICA developmental activities.Likewise, the thrust of themassive training programs of the U.S [ Pobierz caÅ‚ość w formacie PDF ]