Western Europe in the last decade, in addition to re-affirming the vitality of Western civilization as a whole, has justified a more equal sharing of the economic burden of Western defense. Third, this economic progress has been coupled with increased European political, unity and political strength. As your Defense Minister Strauss put it in his

Nash

Washington Memorial lecture at Georgetown University last November;

"In the future, Europe must provide cover for America just as America must provide cover for Europe. The former one way street becomes one where traffic moves in both directions."

This was the context in which the new Administration reviewed its initial defense policies. The immediate and operative decisions after taking office, however, inevitably dealt with men, money and equipment. These decisions, of course, depend upon considerations such as the analysis of the threat and the choice of strategy to meet it. Reflecting our worldwide responsibilities, we recognized three basic types of military challenge which our defense establishment should be designed to deter if possible and fight if necessary: nuclear war; large scale

- 3 -

to deter it possible and fight it necessary: nuclear war; large scales
military challenge which our defense establishment should be designed
our worldwide reasonabilities, we recognized three basic types of
analysis of the threat and the choice of strategy to meet it. Reflecting
these decisions, of course, depend upon considerations such as the
taking office, however, inevitably dealt with men, money and equipment.
initial defense policies. The immediate and operative decisions after
This was the context in which the new Administration reviewed its
one where traffic moves in both directions."

must provide cover for Europe. The former one way street becomes
"In the future, Europe must provide cover for America Just as America
Washington Memorial lecture at Georgetown University last November;
political strength. As your Defense Minister Stramaa but it in his
progress has been coupled with increased European political, unity and
sharing of the economic burden of Western defense. Third, this economic
vitality of Western civilization as a whole, has justified a more equal
Western Europe in the last decade, in addition to re-affirming the

- 3 -

non-nuclear combat; and covert aggression -- ranging from subversion to guerrilla warfare to overt insurgency. Our first task was to provide the force structure, procurement, research and development and training adequate to our responsibilities in all three categories. In doing so, we took into account the capabilities of our allies to meet common threats with collective action.

The first half of our concrete effort has been to improve the quality of our nuclear deterrent and its capacity to survive a surprise attack. The other half of our effort has been to raise substantially the level of our non-nuclear capabilities. We have already made substantial, solid progress in both areas.

The existing program for the construction of POLARIS submarines was accelerated and expanded so that we will have 41 submarines by the end of fiscal 1964. Twelve squadrons totalling 600 hardened and dispersed solid fuel MINUTEMAN strategic missiles have been funded through fiscal 1962, and funds were added for the development of SKYBOLT. To protect our bomber forces from destruction in surprise attack we increased our ground and airborne alert capacities and undertook the installation of bomb alarm detectors and signals at key warning and communication points and at all SAC bases. We accelerated construction of our air defense and warning systems, and are pursuing R&D on an effective AICBM. What has been, perhaps, most significant for the short term future is that it has proved possible to bring 50% of our unarmed bomber force to a 15 minute ground alert status. We also began a careful examination of the

-4-

-4-

Ground alert status. We also began a careful examination of the
possible to bring 20% of our unmanned powder force to a 12 minute
borderline, most significant for the short term future is that it has proved
warning systems, and are pursuing R&D on an effective VICBM. What has been,
and at all SAC bases. We accelerated construction of our air defense and
pomp alarm detectors and signals at key warning and communication points
around and airborne alert capacities and undertook the installation of
our powder forces from destruction in surprise attack we increased our
1965, and funds were added for the development of SKYDOFT. To protect
solid fuel MINUTEMAN strategic missiles have been funded through fiscal
of fiscal 1964. Twelve squadrons totalling 600 hardened and dispersed
accelerated and expanded so that we will have 41 submarines by the end
The existing program for the construction of POEAR12 submarines was
substantial, solid progress in both areas.

the level of our non-nuclear capabilities. We have already made
attack. The other half of our effort has been to raise suboptimally
quality of our nuclear deterrent and its capacity to survive a surprise
The first half of our concrete effort has been to improve the
most common threats with collective action.

In doing so, we took into account the capabilities of our allies to
and training adequate to our responsibilities in all three categories.
provide the force structure, procurement, research and development
to answer threats to overreact inaccuracy. Our first task was to
non-nuclear combat; and convert aggression -- ranging from subversion

(20)

organization and technical aspects of command and control of the strategic deterrent. The object of this program is to assure that the President will have the time and capability personally to make the decision to use nuclear weapons -- if that decision must be made -- and to minimize any possibility of triggering nuclear war by accident or miscalculation.

In assessing today the progress of this effort to improve the survivability and quality of the nuclear deterrent, I think we can honestly claim that very solid and real progress has already been made. There will be more to come.

There was always a certain degree of misunderstanding concerning the so-called missile gap. The question was not so much one of relative numbers but one of the potential survivability of our strategic deterrent. Strength of the deterrent depends in large measure upon that fire power which is likely to survive a massive enemy attack designed to destroy it. As the foregoing programs show, much has and is being done to increase that survivability. Furthermore, it appears to be the consensus of the intelligence community, both in the United States and in FRG, that the Soviet deployment of ICBMs has proceeded less rapidly than it was once feared it might. There has never been any doubt that the West possesses by far the greater nuclear force, including delivery capability, than the USSR. Now that the problems of command and control dispersal and survivability have become manageable, we believe that this force, including the NATO forces deployed on the continent, give the West a

-5-