LETTER FROM SECRETARY OF STATE WILLIAM P. ROGERS OF MARCH 14, 1969, COMMENTING ON ARRANGEMENTS FOR POLITICAL ADVISERS TO MAJOR U.S. MILITARY COMMANDERS (POLADS) AND ENCLOSING AN ANALYSIS AND ASSESSMENT OF THE PROGRAM

THE SECRETARY OF STATE,
WASHINGTON, D.C.,
March 14, 1969.

Hon. HENRY M. JACKSON,
Chairman, Subcommittee on National Security and International
Operations, Committee on Government Operations, U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: In connection with your letter of February 11, and our interim reply of February 24, I am enclosing an up-to-date analysis and assessment of the arrangements for Political Advisers to major U.S. Military Commanders. I also am enclosing a list of officers who have served as political advisers, the dates of their assignment and the posts in which they served following their political adviser tour of duty. The nature of adviser assignments is provided in the staff analysis and assessment enclosed herewith.

Though I have not been closely associated with the political adviser program, I am aware of the development and expansion of the program in recent years and fully support this worthwhile concept. This is a further facet of the recognition accorded to the interdependence of political and military factors in international operations. I am pleased to note that our Military Commanders to whom we have assigned Foreign Service Officers are unanimous in their appraisal of the essentiality and importance of having competent political advisers on their staffs.

As in other programs of importance, we carefully select high quality officers with respect to both professional and personal qualifications. Senior officers are normally assigned these important positions. The assistant political advisers on the other hand are normally selected from the middle grades. Moreover, as indicated by the analysis and assessment in the enclosures, we have, wherever possible in onward assignments, detailed personnel to increasingly responsible positions. which exploit this valuable experience.

The Political Adviser Program is important in enhancing StateDefense general relationships. Of equal importance is the availability to our military commanders of personal advisers proficient in foreign affairs, to assist as necessary in formulation of command policy and action. By continuing high level attention to the needs of the program, I feel sure this usefulness will be sustained. We believe the program merits the continued support of your Subcommittee.

Sincerely yours,

Enclosures:

1. Staff Analysis and Assessment.

2. List of Political Advisers to Date.

WILLIAM P. ROGERS.

Staff Analysis and Assessment of the Political Adviser Program
(POLADs)

The need for foreign policy advice and guidance to meet military problems became readily apparent to military commanders during World War II. A variety of arrangements were implemented to provide this support. The outstanding example was the part played by Ambassador Robert Murphy who served as Political Adviser to General Eisenhower in the North African and European campaigns a quarter of a century ago. Similar arrangements were made in other theaters of military operations.

The post World War II developments that required mutual security treaties and agreements between the United States Government and friendly nations also resulted in the presence of U.S. military facilities and forces in many countries around the world. The stationing abroad of U.S. military personnel in peacetime raised myriad daily problems, large and small, with considerable political implications, as did the development of integrated and cooperative defense measures with our various allies. There was early appreciation that problems connected with our military presence abroad inevitably were of varied politicomilitary nature.

The function of the political adviser is to advise and consult with the military commander and his staff on political, politico-military and economic conditions affecting the commander's area of responsibility. Thus, the political adviser provides a special expertise and is a source of information and advice as a member of the commander's staff. He has no command authority whatsoever. While the channel for official foreign policy instruction to the commander is from the Department of State through the Department of Defense and the military chain of command, or from the Ambassador to the country concerned directly to the military commander concerned, the political adviser is a counselor continually available to the Commander.

In addition to U.S. command political advisers, of which there are currently nine, the three Foreign Service Officers assigned to NATO Commanders are also a part of the political adviser group. These include the Special Assistant to Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) and Special Liaison Officer to Commander-inChief, Allied Forces Southern Europe (CINCSOUTH). In the third case the political adviser to Commander-in-Chief, Atlantic Command is also assigned within the NATO organization as Director of SACLANT's Political-Military Affairs Division. Commanders (U.S. and NATO) to which advisers have been or are currently assigned are shown in enclosure 2.

Political advisers are carefully selected by the Department of State with respect to both professional and personal qualifications. Many attend senior military service colleges prior to their assignment. Grades of advisers at time of assignment have varied in the case of principal advisers from class 3 to Career Minister. In the case of assistants, grades have varied from 0-8 to 0-3 with the 0-4 and O-5 grades predominating. Nominations are made to the military commanders concerned from the Department of State and the commander's approval is necessary prior to assignment of the nominee.

The significance of this lies in the fact that the political adviser is attached to the staff of the military commander and thus is responsible directly to him. Conversely, the political adviser is not an institutional representative of the Department of State although he maintains close contact and is provided with appropriate up-to-date information in order that he can serve and function well in his job. In this regard, geographic bureaus and more specifically, country directors and desk officers within the Department of State are well aware of the needs of the political adviser and of the fundamental responsibility to keep him informed.

Political advisers normally return to Washington whenever necessary to consult with appropriate officials regarding policy developments and political matters affecting their area of interest. The basic responsibility for providing this information rests with the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Politico-Military Affairs, the Regional Bureaus, and the Director of Intelligence Research. Senior officials readily take time to discuss problems of mutual interest and work with political advisers during such visits, and to correspond with them as may be useful. A similar rapport exists in this regard with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense, International Security Affairs.

From time to time, concern has been expressed that political advisers deal with domestic political questions. This has led to suggestions to change the title of political adviser. In each instance, the confusion has been eliminated by referring attention to the fact that our political advisers are in no way connected or related to domestic or partisan politics.

In summary, the role of the political adviser is unique. The political adviser is a Foreign Service Officer who is placed in an advisory and consultative position on the staff of a military commander. This role represents an organizational recognition of the dual political and military responsibilities of our senior military commanders. The program has proven to be of great value and has survived the test of experience. The ingredients for success are high quality personnel assigned to the program, close personal relationship of the political adviser to the commander and timely provision of information to political advisers by all segments within the Department of State.

February 1951 to October 1952.. Dept. Counselor 11/52; Amb., Japan 12/56; Amb., Bel-
gium 2/61; A Secy. Cong. Affairs 3/65; Spec. Adv. to
Secy. 3/67; Amb., Austria 4/67-.

November 1952 to March 1955. Amb., Vietnam 4/55; Dept. Counselor 3/57; Amb., UAR

May 1955 to September 1957.

and Yemen 1/60; Amb., Italy 4/61; Retired 3/68.
Dep. Chief Mission (DCM), Karachi 10/57; Ops. Coord.
Board (OCB), Dep. Exec. Off. 8/59; Consul General
(CG), Damascus and Amb. 10/60; Amb., Belgium 6/65–.
DCM, USRO Paris and Dep. US Rep. NATO Council
4/61; Dep. Dir., Dept. Ops. Ctr. 10/61; Amb., Haiti
12/61; Fac. Adv., Air Univ. 8/63; Amb., Somali Rep.
9/65-.

DCM, Moscow 7/63; Dep. A Secy., Eur. Affairs 9/65;
Amb., Poland 7/68-.

Amb., Tanzania 9/65-.
Dept. For. Serv. Insp. 5/67-.

Dept. Personnel, Ops. Div., Eur., Bu. Chief 9/58; Dept.
Eur. Bu., OIC Swiss-Benelux Aff. 6/61; Dept. Eur. Bu.,
Dep. Dir. West. Eur. 10/62; Imperial Def. Coll. 12/63;
Political Couns., New Delhi 4/64; Dep. Pol. Couns.,
Saigon 6/68-.