Evening star., 1951-04-07
General MocArthur's Grievance

As a military commander General Mac
Arthur had no business writing the kind Of letter
he has sent to Joe Martin, Republican leader in
the House. As the military commander respon-
Sible for the safety of an army and the conduct
OF a campaign in Korea, however, he has ample
reason to feel that the politicians are directing
that war, and that they are doing a very poor
job Of it.
The letter to Mr.. Martin appears to urge the
use OF Nationalist Chinese troops on Formosa to
open second front on the mainland and also
sets out an overall strategic estimate that is
diametricaly opposed to the views of the admin
istration and the United Nations. 1t is possible,
Of course that General Macarthur is right on
both counts. The weight of competent opinion is
heavily against him, however, and the decision,
both as to the isolation Of the forces on Formosa
and the relative Importance of Western Europe
and the Far East, is not likely to be reversed
unless there should be a significant change in
the character of the Korean war. In view of
this, 1t was clearly improper for General Mac
Arthur to attack the decision through what he
knew to be partisan political medium.
lecture on the military prophecies, how
ever, does not serve as an answer to the larger
military question. How do General MacArthurs
critics propose to carry the Korean war to sue
cessful conclusion, or, alternatively how do they
propose to secure an end to the fighting? II
they viii not accept his views on the question,
have they any plan Of their own? One is very
much inclined to say that they have no plan
worthy of the name.
The U. N. direction of the war has all but
collapsed. That agency is not willing to accept
any new risks and it does not know how to
extricate itself from the position it is in. The
attitude of some elements in Britain is especially
Conference of Labor Women, attacks on the
United States and General Macarthur were
vigorously applauded. The. theme of these
attacks was that the United States is an i'm
perialistic nation trying to aprofiteer from the
sale of munitions, and that General Macarthur
is simply furthering that dirty business. This,
Of course, is not the attitude Of the British gov
ernment. But the fact remains that Britain,
having committed very small forces to the
Korean war and being unwilling to commit any
more, is emerging as severe and increasingly
hostile critic of the conduct of the fighting.
This British attitude, shared in varying de-
grees by other U. N. members, adds to our own
Governments difficulties. It may be that the
President would like to relieve General Mac
Arthur of his command But popular support
for General Macarthur in this country and
public resentment Of the attitude of some of
our Allies, makes such move difficult and risky.
Furthermore, the replacement of General
Macarthur with another commander would not
answer the basic question. There still would
be no effective plan for ending the war and
no willingness on the part of our associates to
make the sacrifices necessary to win it. The
same strategic vacuum would continue to exist,
and as long as it does exist the temptation will
be strong for General Macarthur, or any other
commander, for that matter, to move into 1t.
war calls for action not thumb -twiddling on
the part of the master planners