Evening star., 1946-02-15
u. S. MiIituy Missions

In legislation drafted by the State,
War and Navy Departments and
sponsored by Chairman May of the
House Military Affairs Committee,
1t Is now proposed that the President
be empowered to send special mis-
sions to foreign lands in any part
Of the world to help those lands
tain, reorganize or modernize their
armed forces. In the past, other
countries eS-Germarly not least of all
H-have done this as a matter of
course, but it would represent dis
tinctly new departure In American
policy, and for that reason Congress
presumably will study it most care
fully.
Under existing law, except in time
OF war or national emergency, the
President is authorized to send mill
tary missions only to the Philippines
or to the nations desiring them in
the Western Hemisphere. The pro-
posed measure would extend this
power to include any country any
where at any time, provided, ma
turally, that the country asked for
such help and that the President
considered it in the interest of the
United States to accede to the re-
quest. All arrangements of the kind
apparently would be worked out in
the form of bilateral agreements,
but 1t is not clear whether these
would be subject to congressional
approval.
There are excellent reasons, of
course, why the proposal should re-
ceive the prompt consideration of
Congress. Since 1912, for example,
we have had special group in Iran
to advise that country in improving
its army and gendarmerie, but the
authority to maintain the project
will last no longer than the Presi-
dents war-emergency powers, which
may expire any time within the
next several months. Similarly, un-
til there is legislative action one way
or the other, no presidential COM
mitment can be made on a reported
request from Syria for American
help of comparable sort. The same
holds true for what the President,
the State. War and Navy Depart
ments and the Chungking govern
ment may deem desirable in the
case of China-namely, long-term
mllltary-naval mission to make the
Chinese armed establishment more
efficient and modern and thus to
help build strong, unified and
stable country.
At the same time, however, al
though there is thus a great deal
to be said in favor of the proposed
legislation, it is obvious, as Repre-
sentative Mundt of South Dakota
has pointed out, that careful
thought must be given to the posi-
bility that such change in Ameri-
can policy might create information
al resentment or suspicion. The
French, for instance, have long had
special influence in Syria. How will
they feel should we move in there
now with special mission? How
will the Russians feel If we main
tain our present project in Iran. and
an even more elaborate one in China,
on a long-term basis? How would
the people of the United States feel
If the Soviet Union or some other
European power did the same, sort
OF thing in Mexico at Mexico's re-
quest?
Undoubtedly, as envisioned by its
advocates, the changed policy would
be so operated as to give no offense
to any power. Moreover, to cite but
one example, China, if it so wishes,
and the United States, If 1t agrees,
have every right to work out an ar
rangement for military-naval mis-
sion. Nevertheless questions OF the
sort raised by Mr.. Mundt would seem
to be sufficiently pertinent to merit
full attention in Congress before ac-
tion is taken on the matter.