Address at the Sesquicentennial Convocation of the United States Military Academy.

General Irving, General Bradley, Dr. Compton, Honorable Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air force, and distinguished guests:

I want to make a statement--just two statements, before I start my regular talk.

I had luncheon at noon with nine Missouri cadets, and I want to say to them--and I am saying it very publicly--that I haven't had a more 'pleasant luncheon in many a day. I appreciated it very much.

I have another statement to make. You know, the President has several positions in which he works. He is President of the United States and Commander in Chief of the Armed forces of the United States, and he is the social head of state, and he is the head of his party. And I am going to work in two of those capacities right this minute.

As President of the United States, under the Constitution, the President has power to pardon anybody for anything but impeachment. Of course, he couldn't pardon himself. So, exercising my authority as President of the United States, under the Constitution, I direct the Commandant of West Point to relieve all this special punishment that is going on, on the Post today. And as Commander in Chief of the Armed forces of the United States, I direct General Irving to carry out that order.

Now you know, I am in a sort of position that Senator Barkley found himself in one time. And I want this to be distinctly understood, that I enjoyed immensely the two speeches that were made before me. They were wonderful. I hope I can make half the contribution that either one of those wonderful men made.

But Senator Barkley was the last one on a program, and Senator Barkley likes to speak, and he took his watch out and put it on the stand and he spoke for about an hour. Then he looked at the watch, and he picked it up and put it to his ear and shook it; and some old gentleman out in the audience said, "Senator, if it has stopped, there's a calendar behind you."

Well, you are not going to need a calendar because this is not that long. I hope it won't be as boresome as you may anticipate it will be.

It is a real pleasure for me to be here today, and to join in celebrating the establishment of the United States Military Academy at West Point 150 years ago.

This Academy was started during Thomas Jefferson's first term as President. The United States at that time was relatively small and weak, and surrounded by dangers. We had just fought a limited and undeclared war with France to protect the freedom of our commerce and shipping. We were engaged in fighting another limited and undeclared war with the Barbary Pirates for the same purpose.

Jefferson, like Washington and Hamilton and other leaders of our young Republic, knew very well that a strong military establishment was vital to the preservation of American liberty. And those patriot leaders knew also that you cannot have effective military forces unless you have well-trained, well-prepared officers. They all knew how Washington had to struggle and experiment all through the Revolution to find officers who could take troops into battle and lead them to victory. That was why they wanted a military academy, as an essential part of a strong, permanent national defense organization.

But there was a great deal of opposition to starting a military academy in this country. It took 20 years of argument and persuasion after the Revolution was over before the Academy could be started. Now, listen to this: It was finally started largely because Jefferson took the position that if the Congress didn't authorize a military academy, he would start one up himself!

The argument over establishing a military academy was part and parcel of the argument over whether the United States should have strong national defenses. That argument has continued, of course, right down to the present day, and much of the debate after the Revolution is very, very modern. They are making those same old arguments today, just as they were made about the Military Academy when Jefferson was trying to start it.

There were a lot of people in this country in 1800 who were afraid that setting up a military academy and an army and navy would make us belligerent and warlike. You can hear echoes of that point of view today in the debate over universal military training.

There were a lot of other people in 1800 who said that a strong national defense would cost too much; that we couldn't afford it, that we ought to find some magic formula for achieving security without having to pay for it. That point of view is not only echoed today--it is loudly shouted in the newspapers and the halls of Congress.

Fortunately, these arguments did not prevail against the hardheaded commonsense of men like Jefferson. The Military Academy was set up; and this country has had occasion to be thankful many times since then that our early leaders had so much foresight.

The Military Academy has repaid this country many times over for every cent it has cost. We have learned from experience that, while it may be expensive to maintain a strong national defense, it is much more expensive not to have one. Time and again we have allowed our Armed forces to dwindle to a fraction of what they should have been, and then we have had to pay enormously--in money and in lives--because of our lack of preparedness. There are people right now who want us to relax and cut down on our defense program. They are just as wrong as they can be. We must pay the cost of preventing a world war--or we will surely have to pay the immensely greater cost of fighting one.

The other fear of the early opponents of the Military Academy has also proved groundless. Our country has never become warlike or aggressive.

That is partly because our Constitution nailed down so firmly the principle of civilian control over the military. The most important means by which this was done was by providing in the Constitution that the President, who is the civilian head of the Government elected by the people, shall be Commander in Chief of all the military forces. Many Presidents, including the present one, have demonstrated that those words in the Constitution mean just what they say.

But, in addition to this, the spirit of our people has never been warlike. Our people came to this country to find peace and freedom. That is what we have always wanted. That is what we want now, and that is what our national policy is designed to preserve.

But there is a vast difference between being peaceful and being passive. We want to achieve peace. But we know we can't have it unless we are willing to stand up for our rights.

We know we can't have lasting peace unless we work actively and vigorously to bring about conditions of freedom and justice in the world. That is what we are trying to do. We are having to do it in the face of a concerted campaign of threats and sabotage and outright aggression directed by the Soviet Union.

The policies of the Soviet Union are exactly the opposite of our own. We want to establish equality and justice and the rule of law among all nations. They want to establish domination and dictatorship and the rule of force over all countries. The Bolsheviks want physical control of the individual, and they also want to control his thoughts and his soul. This makes our situation--the situation of all free nations--difficult and dangerous in the extreme. But I am firmly convinced that it does not necessarily mean a third world war.

The free countries can, by proper and adequate defense measures, make clear to the Kremlin that aggression would be doomed to failure.

And the free nations can, by economic and political means, build up their strength so as to be safe from Communist infiltration and subversion.

But strong and active as we may be, we cannot avoid risks and sacrifices. They are inherent in the situation and we cannot wish them out of existence. The course of events is not completely in our control.

In Korea we had no choice but to meet armed aggression with military force. If we had not met aggression head-on, the United Nations Charter would have been reduced to a scrap of paper. If Communist aggression had been allowed to succeed in Korea, the Communist conquest of all Asia would have been simply a matter of time. If the United Nations had failed, and Asia had fallen, we would have been well on the way to a disintegration of freedom in the whole world.

But that did not happen. The valor and sacrifice of United States fighting men-together with the forces of the Republic of Korea and the contingents from 15 other countries--has beaten the aggressors back within their own territory. Our Army, led in large part by men trained here at West Point, has done a superb job. From the time our men were first sent into action, in the gallant rear guard defense down to the Pusan perimeter--from then right on up to the present, the United States Army in Korea has been magnificent. And the men who have fought with them--in the Air force, the Navy, and the Marine Corps, and from the armed forces of other free countries-have been just as brave and just as effective.

Last June, 11 months ago, the badly battered Communists offered to confer about a military armistice in Korea. We were willing to conclude such an armistice. And we still are. We don't want any more fighting than is necessary. But we were not interested, and we are not interested now, in any armistice that involves selling out the principles for which we are fighting.

Patiently and skillfully, General Ridgway and his negotiating team, headed by Admiral Joy, have worked to bring about an effective armistice. They have done a masterful job in the face of great provocation. They have met threats, and abuse, and outright lies, all with great self-control and an unyielding insistence on the essentials of a just and honorable armistice.

Gradually, the Communists have come to realize that we will not sacrifice our principles to obtain an armistice. We do not know whether they will finally agree on an honest and workable armistice. So far, they have agreed to some of the points that must be covered. They have agreed that the armistice line across Korea should be a defensible military line determined by the location of the opposing forces. They have agreed that no reinforcements shall be brought into Korea by either side during the armistice. They have agreed that an inspection commission shall observe the carrying out of the armistice terms--and are apparently willing to withdraw their request that the Soviet Union should be one of the inspecting nations.

Up to now, however, the Communists have not agreed upon a fair and proper exchange of prisoners of war. The Communists have continued to insist that all the prisoners we have taken must be handed over to them--regardless of whether or not they are willing to be sent back behind the Iron Curtain, and regardless of what their fate would be if they were sent back.

It is perfectly clear that thousands and thousands of prisoners we hold would violently resist being returned to the Communists because they fear the slavery or death which would await them. It would be a betrayal of the ideals of freedom and justice for which we are fighting if we forced these men at bayonet point to return to their exmasters. We won't do it. We won't buy an armistice by trafficking in human slavery.

We do not know whether the Communists will accept that position. We may not know for some time yet. Negotiations are continuing under General Clark's direction. We shall remain ready to reach honorable settlements by peaceful means. But we must also be alert and ready to meet treachery or a renewal of aggression if that should come.

During these months of armistice negotiations in Korea, the Communists have increased their military strength. They have more men there than they had a year ago, and many more tanks and planes.

But we have consolidated and increased our strength in Korea, also. The morale of our men is high, and our units are well trained, well equipped, and at a peak of combat efficiency. The troops of the Republic of Korea are far better trained and equipped than they were a year ago, and are capable of carrying a much larger share of the defense of their country.

The situation in Korea is still difficult and uncertain. Everybody should understand that. But everyone should also understand that the sacrifices of the United Nations in Korea have brought tremendous gains toward a world of law and order.

The plain fact is that the Communists have utterly failed in their objectives in Korea.

The Communist aggression failed to shatter the United Nations. Instead, the Communist attack has made the United Nations stronger and more vigorous and has demonstrated that it can and will act to defend freedom in the world.

The Communists failed to win a cheap and easy victory in Korea. Instead, they have suffered more than a million casualties, and have used up enormous amounts of war material--and they are back behind the line where they started.

The Communists failed to establish tyranny over the Republic of Korea. Instead, the Communist aggression has brought devastation to North Korea--a terrible warning to the other satellites in the Soviet empire of the cost of aggression.

Furthermore, the Communists failed to break the will of free men in other countries. The attack on Korea was supposed to warn other countries that they must yield to the demands of the Kremlin--or else. The Communist aggression did show the world that the Kremlin was ready and willing to try to extend its power by military conquest. But the effect of this was not to send the free countries into a panic of fear. Instead, they immediately stepped up their plans for building military forces, and began to get together on concrete and definite defense arrangements.

As a result of the resistance to Communist aggression in Korea, the Kremlin knows that free men will stand up and fight against aggression. As a result of the resistance to Communist aggression in Korea, free men around the world know that if they stand up for what is right, they will not be deserted by the United Nations. And, as a result of the resistance to Communist aggression in Korea, the free countries. are infinitely better prepared to defend themselves than they were 2 years ago.

Our own defense production has risen very sharply. Our production of military supplies and equipment is more than three times what it was a year ago. For example, in January 1952 six times the dollar value of ammunition was delivered as was delivered in January 1951. In electronics and communication equipment, five times as much was delivered.

The production of one of our most important fighter planes was four times as much this spring as it was last. We now have several thousand tanks of a new model which is very much better than the previous models. Our Navy has taken hundreds of ships out of mothballs and has a sound shipbuilding program underway.

An atomic artillery piece has been developed and tested and will have to be reckoned with in the future. The Navy is working on its first atomic powered submarine. Our overall atomic production program is in excellent shape.

In all the vast and complicated field of combat vehicles and military weapons, the research and preparation of the last several years are paying off. The goods are being delivered to the hands of men who are ready to use them in defense of freedom--both in our own forces and among the many trusted friends that we have all over the world.

The improvement in defense production is not the only indication of an improved situation in the world.

In the far East, Japan has rejoined the family of free and democratic nations. The Communist insurrection in the Philippines has been brought under control. In Indochina, the forces of France and the associated states have succeeded in holding the Communists in check. The people of Indochina are making progress in the creation of national armies to defend their own independence. Countries like India and Pakistan and Indonesia are making real headway in creating the conditions of economic growth that must underlie solid and stable progress.

In Europe, great steps toward unity are being taken. The Schuman plan and the plans for the European Defense Community are moving forward. We are working to reach final agreement on a new relationship with the Federal Republic of Germany. This will make it possible for Germany to take her place alongside the other independent countries of Europe as a full and equal member of the community of nations.

These are very remarkable developments. Countries like France, Germany, Italy, glum, Holland, and Luxembourg, centuries of rivalry behind them, are starting to work together. They are developing common economic and political institutions, and they are merging their forces into one great defensive system.

No wonder the Soviets are trying to block this advance. No wonder the current Communist propaganda line is trying to persuade the countries of Western Europe that they should stay separate and weak, instead of joining together for strength. The Kremlin knows as well as anyone else that in union there is strength--and that a united Europe can frustrate the Kremlin's dearest wish of absorbing the European countries one by one into the Soviet Empire.

I don't think the people of Europe are going to be fooled by this Soviet propaganda. I believe the firm and concrete steps the Europeans have already taken, over the opposition of the Kremlin, are clear indications that they are not going to be stopped. I think the Europeans are going to continue to move toward closer union--for they know that is the way of strength and progress for them and for the whole free world.

I have been speaking of the progress that is being made. But I don't want anyone to get the impression that there is any basis for relaxing or letting up. These signs of progress are not evidence that the battle for freedom is won--only that we are on the way to winning it. If we halt or falter now, we could ruin the whole structure of peace and freedom we have been so painfully building.

I have warned the Congress, on several occasions, that the financial support I have requested for our defense effort and for the mutual security program is absolutely necessary. Any cuts in those items would have extremely serious effects. No one enjoys bearing the heavy costs of national security in these dangerous times, but we should never forget how much smaller they are than the costs of another war.

No one should assume that the possibility of world war has become remote. The forces of the Soviet Empire are large, welltrained, and equipped with modern weapons. The Kremlin's desire to dominate the world is obviously unchanged.

But I believe we are well on the way to preserving our freedom without paying the frightful cost of world war. We are on the right track. And we must go ahead.

If we are to succeed, we must have steady nerves and stout hearts. There is no easy way out, no quick solution. But we have with us the overwhelming support of the free countries, and the powerful moral forces of liberty and justice. We are using the strength God has given us in this great and wonderful Nation to win the struggle for peace and freedom throughout the world.

You young men here at West Point are called on to play a great part in the tremendous effort we are making. You are being trained for a career which, in these times especially, means service for the great good of your Nation and the welfare of all mankind. Your opportunities are great because the task ahead of you is great.

We need--all of us--to draw on the wonderful tradition of resolution and courage which has been cherished for 150 years in the life of the cadets here at West Point.