Evening star., 1947-02-25
Budget Cutting Awaits
Inspection. Of Items

iSH@$AsSst VI skShsS
Congress Must Get Clear Idea of
Potential Defense Task
By David Laurence
Although the Senate and House may
put an overall ceiling on budget ex-
penditures, the question of how much
real cutting will be done in every cate
CORY of expense probably win remain
undecided until the present session of
Congress has gone through all the
appropriations.
Already the assumption that the
military and naval expenditures viii be
reduced drastically has stirred UP con-
siderable controversy. Many Of those
members Of Congress who do not want
to see much budget cutting, because
they want to continue the era of spend
ing, are taking refuge behind the mill
tary security issue. The country is being
warned that this or that size Of budget
means threat to national security.
Despite all this talk about the cutting
of the Army and Navy, no overall
examination of the expenditures re-
quired for defense has been made yet
by Congress itself. To the extent that
members begin to familiarize them
selves with the items desired by the
Army or Navy, as the case may be, ex-
pressions of protest are heard concern
ing the cutting of the overall budget.
1t is most unfortunate that council Of
national defense, such as the Navy pro-
posed some time ago, is not in existence.
Certainly such a council, far from ex-
pressing an opinion on how the budget
should be cut or even how much should
be spent in lump sum, would state
just what the defense problems OF the
United States may be.
Task Must Be Understood.
Until the Nation understands what
the Army and Navy and the Air Forces
are expected to do by way Of defending
the security of the United States, 1t
appears useless to talk about individual
items of any size in the budget.
The usual outcry against any form
of cutting of the military budgets is
being heard on Capitol Hill. This is
only serving to stiffen resistance on the
part of many members of Congress to
pleas for the retention of large expendi-
lures.
The Army and Navy have never been
told by the State Department what
their potential war mission is expected
to be. Until this is clearly defined, 1t
will be difficult to turn down the de-
mands of Congress for economy, and
the result will be much more drastic
cutting of military and naval budgets
than otherwise would be the case.
At the moment, most Of the discus
sion is theoretical. 1t is based on
fighting World War II over again. Not
withstanding the introduction Of the
atomic bomb, requests for the purchases
of materials for the continued produc-
ton OF obsolete weapons are being
regularly approved. 1t is true that no
military establishment can afford to
stand STILL but it Is also true that when
Congress begins to find out how much
money is being spent currently for
munitions that will never be fired,
there will be a tendency to cut deeper
than the military men have reckoned.
The question of how big the Army,
Navy or Air Forces should be is not to
be decided by fixing lump sum and
asking the services to- split It three
ways or by allocating amounts to each
II they fail to agree. National defense
would not be assured that way.
Definite Policy Required.
What is needed is the fixing OF q
definite policy for the fighting OF the
theoretical war. Everybody knows that
this is the real task Of the War and
Navy Departments in all countries in
time of peace. The public may mis-
construe this as indicating a belief that
war is inevitable. Nothing could be
more absurd than to relate preparations
at this time with any predictions OF
war.
The problem Is now, as it always has
been, to select q theoretical enemy
power and plan Americas defense
against possible attack from such
power. Whatever is needed to fight
such a war constitutes the extent OF an
American preparedness program, and.
if this were brought out into the open.
the people would sanction the expendi-
lures. Much misunderstanding arises
from the fact that War and Navy De-
partments are supposed to prepare for
any eventuality and yet they are sup
posed to hide the fact that they are
preparing for specific eventualities.
Today the case for open preparation
is clearer because it will be the United
Nations or a grouping Of those coun-
tries in the U. NJ which will carry on
the next war. 1t seems unlikely that
the United States would allow herself
to be placed in the position OF preparing
for war without realizing that in such
a contingency the other members of the
U. N. would 60 along with the United
States.
To support the U. N, therefore, 1t Is
necessary that the United States as
sumo that combination Of armies and
navies will be needed to repress any
power which seeks aggression.
Reproduction Rights Reserved)