Evening star., 1952-07-31
Army Denies Grow
Sought War on Reds,
Charges Distortion
By John A. Giles


The Army today denied that
Maj. Gen. Robert w. Grow be-
lieyed in a hit -'em- -first-war with
Russia and angrily accused Com
munist propagandists of distort-
ing and inyenting passages in the
diary of the convicted General.
It produced excerpts from the
now top secret journal to back
its contentious.
Gen. Grow has been convicted
OF jotting down military secrets
In his personal diary while he was
an attache at the American EN-
bassy in Moscow and the letting
the document fall into Russian
hands. He had been sentenced
to a reprimand and suspension
from command for six months.
Army Gives Analysis.
At the request of reporters, the
Army supplied point-by-potnt
analysis of passages in the Com
munist book that contains alleged
excerpts from the diary. 1t did
not display the diary itself. how
ever.
The books author. Richard
SquireS. "is trying to prove that
the United States was intending
to wage war before July, 1852.
while the whole context points
up a United States estimate of
Soviet intentions to wage war"
declared the Army.
The Army also disclosed:
/. 1t has been unable to discuss
the Grow diary heretofore for fear
of prejudicing the hush-hush court
martial at Fort Meade, Md. be-
fore seven major generals.
2. officials are now certain the
Soviet spy who photographed the
Grow diary in Frankfurt. Ger
many, in June, 1851, did not gain
access to all portions Of the docu-
ment. Furthermore. certain en-
tries were made after the diary
had been compromised.
Therefore. the whole document
is now classified top secret" al
though the Army did make certain
sections available in its analysis.
It appeared this action was with
approval of higher authority, in
cluding the State Department.
Statements Challenged.
According to propaganda the
Soviet poured out last year to
bolster war-mongering charges
against the United States, Gen.
Grow wrote in his diary while in
Moscow:
War! AS soon as possible!
Now!"
Said the Army analysis:
This statement does not ap-
pear in the diary"
The Squires book, entitled "On
the Path to War;" stated:
Again and again Grow comes
back to the argument of starting
the war in 1851. My conclusions.
he writes on January 8, 1851,
might be approximately summa-
rized as follows: This is the year!
BY this year Grow means the
year that will see the outbreak
Of the war for which he is long
ing"
Here's the Army's reply:
Again this excerpt has been
twisted from the meaning of the
whole context, which was not in
tended as pointing to United
States aggression but as an esti-
mate of hostile Soviet inten-I
tions. The whole context follows:
Started study on an estimate
Barbour Orchard M. Barbour,
first secretary at the embassy
wants this week on Soviet inten-
tions-particular reference to the
military. Typed notes all eve
ning-sort of thinking out loud.
My conclusions come pretty close
to: This is the year. They can't
afford to let the balance tip in
our favor. They must have Euro
pean industry to compete with
us-or destroy ours-not a simple
task"
Passages Are Denied.
The Army also denied that this
statement from Squires' book ap-
peared in the generals diary:
Our attack should be directed
at enemy weakness. Although the
military services are primarily
concerned with military weapons
and methods, we must under
stand that this war it total war
and is fought with all weapons.
Similarly it fatty denied the
existence Of these passages in the
diary with which the Soviet
propagandistS have bombarded
Europe and the world:
I'VE must learn that in this
war it is fair to hit below the
belt.
But how is this unbelievable