Evening star., 1950-03-25
Does Eisenhower Disown 1t?

General EisenhoWer's publicly announced
doubts as to the adequacy of our national de-
lenses should be thoroughly explored and weighed
by Congress without delay. 1t is most disturb
Ing to learn that this top-rankng military ex-
pert is alarmed over the state of the Nation S
security-an attitude in striking contrast to that
OF Defense Secretary Johnson. Disturbing, also,
is the inference which may be gained from Gen
eral Eisenhower's Columbia University address
that some of our military cutbackS have been
made against his advice.
General EisenhoWer's warning is not only
diSquieting but incomprehensble, in view of
Secretary Johnson's recent assertion to reporters
that the pending $13 billion economy budget was
prepared under General EisenhoWer's personal
supervision. When that budget was sent to
Congress Mr.. johnson held a press conference
at which he described the defense fund request
as Ike Ill" He explained that General Eisen-
hover had played major part in reducing the
original $50 billion estimates of the three services
to reasonable proportions. The reporters were
told that the original estimates were called
Ike IT, that subsequent budget prepared by
the former supreme commander in Europe was
labeled like II" and that the final product after
revisions by General Bradley and Secretary
Johnson, was known as like III" The Defense
Secretary gave the press the distinct impression
agreement with the reductions made in the
budget but had initiated most or all of them.
Against this background it is puzzling to
consider this statement by the Columbia presi-
dent: America has already disarmed to the
extent-in some directions even beyond the ex-
tent-that I, with deep concern for her present
safety, could possibly advise until we have GER
tain knowledge that all nations are doing like
wise EmDh9SiS UVnn this comment nv his
additional statement that weakness in the face
of Soviet strength is 'well-nigh as criminal as
war ITSELF"
Contrast General Eisenhowers glunn ap-
prasal of our military strength with the very
optimistic picture painted by Secretary Johnson
in numerous public statements and in his recent
semiannual report to Congress. In the latter
report, Mr.. Johnson declared that in trimming
"fat" from the military establishment, muscle"
had been added. More specifically he said that
the combat effectiveness of the Army had been
increased, the overall readiness of the Navy had
been improved and the strategic striking power
of the Air Force had been materially augmented
All of this improvement presumably was effected
while General Eisenhower was serving as special
adviser to the Defense Secretary on the military
budget
1t is hard to reconcile General Eisenhower's
estimate of our present military strength with
the assurances of Secretary Johnson that our
defenses are Gin grand shape" and Sufficient
unto the needs of the hour" The public will
be confused and Withal, worried until this ap-
parent conflict of views is cleared up salts
factorily. That is why the Senate Military APP
preparations Subcommittee has acted wisely in
requesting General Eisenhower to give a full
explanation of his remarks at Columbia.