For anyone that likes to read about the Korean War, the Smithsonian Magazine has an interesting article that includes redacted testimony given by the Joint Chiefs of Staff to Congress in regards to General Douglas MacArthur’s request to expand the war into mainland China. In the redacted testimony the Joint Chiefs made a very good argument on why the limited war against China actually favored the United States military instead of hindering it during the Korean War:
Brigadier General Courtney Whitney, government section, Far East Command; General Douglas MacArthur, Commander-in-Chief, United Nations Command, and Major General Edward Almond (at right, pointing), Commanding General, X Corps in Korea, observe the shelling of Incheon from the USS Mount McKinley. (Public Domain via Wikicommons)
Other remarks contradicted MacArthur’s recurrent complaint about the advantage the Chinese derived from the administration’s refusal to grant him permission to bomb targets beyond the Yalu River in China. Democrat Walter George of Georgia, echoing MacArthur’s assertion that “China is using the maximum of her force against us,” said it was unfair that MacArthur had to fight a limited war while the Chinese fought all out.
Omar Bradley responded that George was quite mistaken—and, by implication, that MacArthur was quite misleading. The Chinese were not fighting all out, not by a great deal. “They have not used air against our front line troops, against our lines of communication in Korea, our ports; they have not used air against our bases in Japan or against our naval air forces.” China’s restraint in these areas had been crucial to the survival of American and U.N. forces in Korea. On balance, Bradley said, the limited nature of the war benefited the United States at least as much as it did the Chinese. “We are fighting under rather favorable rules for ourselves.”
Vandenberg amplified this point. “You made the statement, as I recall it, that we were operating against the Chinese in a limited fashion, and that the Chinese were operating against us in an unlimited fashion,” the air chief said to Republican Harry Cain of Washington.
“Yes, sir,” Cain replied.
“I would like to point out that that operates just as much a limitation, so far, for the Chinese as it has for the United Nations troops in that our main base of supply is the Japanese islands. The port of Pusan is very important to us.”
“It is indeed.”
“Our naval forces are operating on the flanks allowing us naval gunfire support, carrier aircraft strikes, and the landing of such formations as the Inchon landing, all without the Chinese air force projecting itself into the area,” Vandenberg said. “Therefore, the sanctuary business, as it is called, is operating on both sides, and is not completely a limited war on our part.”
George Marshall, the secretary of defense and a five-star general himself, made the same argument. Marshall, insisting on “the greatest concern for confidentiality,” said he had asked the joint chiefs just hours before: “What happens to the Army if we do bomb, and what happens to our Army if we don’t bomb in that way.” The chiefs’ conclusion: “Their general view was that the loss of advantage with our troops on the ground was actually more than equaled by the advantages which we were deriving from not exposing our vulnerability to air attacks.”
In other words—and this was Marshall’s crucial point, as it had been Vandenberg’s—the limitations on the fighting in Korea, so loudly assailed by MacArthur and his supporters, in fact favored the American side. [Smithsonian Magazine]
You can read much more at the link, but another fact of interest in the article was the assessment of Chiang Kai-shek’s military in Taiwan. MacArthur had wanted to use Chiang’s army to open another front against the Communists. His Army was however, assessed by the Joint Chiefs to be of little value due to poor training, equipment, and it was riddled with Communist infiltrators. Additionally Chiang was assessed to have little to no legitimacy on mainland China.
All of this showed why President Truman fired MacArthur and also why the Republicans in Congress quietly withdrew support for him for President. The Republicans instead threw their support behind another general, Dwight Eisenhower which history has shown was a far wiser choice for President than MacArthur.
It seems to me people are getting way ahead of themselves in regards to the upcoming Inter-Korean Summit ending the Korean War:
South and North Korea are discussing plans to announce an official end to the military conflict between the two countries that are still technically at war, the Munhwa Ilbo newspaper reported, citing an unidentified South Korean official.
At next week’s summit between South Korea President Moon Jae-in and North Korea leader Kim Jong Un, the two neighbors may release a joint statement saying they will seek to ease military tension and to end confrontation, according to the report. [Bloomberg]
Before people get all euphoric about the end of the Korean War it is important to realize South Korea cannot negotiate an end to the Korean War because they are not a signatory to the Armistice Agreement. They will need China, the United States, and United Nations to agree to it as well. So what exactly is being negotiated?:
“We are devising and discussing various ways to develop the security situation surrounding the peninsula into a permanent peace regime,” the official said on condition of anonymity. “One such way may be changing the armistice agreement to a peace treaty, and we are reviewing the possibility of it.”
But he said South Korea alone cannot decide on ending the war as the issue requires close discussion with countries directly involved, including North Korea.
Although the armistice was signed by North Korea, China and the United Nations Command, without South Korea, the official said it is undeniable South Korea is one of the countries directly involved.
“But the two Koreas alone cannot decide on signing a peace treaty, so we may have to seek a three-party or four-party agreement if necessary.”
He noted that when Moon’s special envoys visited Pyongyang in March, Kim himself said his country would not take military action against the South.
“In the joint declaration to be announced by Moon and Kim after the summit, we want to include an agreement to ban hostilities, although it is not known yet whether we can use the term ‘end of the war,'” the official said. “However, we expect to include such an agreement in some form of expression.” [Korea Times]
That is the key term being negotiated, “a ban on hostilities”. I would be surprised if President Trump signs up for a peace treaty ending the war without verifiable denuclearization by North Korea. The Kim regime probably understands this as well. I think what the Kim regime may be trying to do is at least get an agreement to ban hostilities in order to make it more difficult for President Trump to launch a strike when they inevitably break whatever agreement they sign up for.
If the past is any indication of the future, they will break the agreement after receiving the aid they want and blame the US or ROK for its failure for some imaginary reason. The ban on hostilities could then possibly constrain the US President from responding militarily while the Kim regime continues to break the agreement. If the US does strike anyway the Kim regime can then claim that the US broke the hostility agreement and thus justify them expanding their nuclear program and taking whatever hostilities they want. In the minds of the Kim regime, they win either way.
A Canadian veteran of the 1950-53 Korean War, Claude Charland (L), receives a plaque of appreciation from Army Maj. Gen. Park Jung-hwan, chief of the 1st Infantry Division, before a commemorative ice hockey game, the Imjin Classic 2018, at the Yulgok Wetland Park in the South Korean border town of Paju, north of Seoul, on Jan. 19, 2018. The Canadian Embassy organized the game, which coincided with the Feb. 9-25 PyeongChang 2018 Winter Olympics torch relay, in partnership with the PyeongChang Organizing Committee. During the 1950-53 Korean War, Canadian soldiers stationed near the front lines carved out a makeshift hockey rink on the frozen Imjin River, and two regiments played friendly hockey matches. (Yonhap)
Veterans and their families of the 1950-53 Korean War, alongside South Korean soldiers, offer a one-minute silent prayer at the U.N. Memorial Cemetery in the southern port city of Busan on Nov. 11, 2017, to pay tribute to U.N. troops killed in the conflict. Organized by the Ministry of Patriots and Veterans Affairs, the Turn Toward Busan ceremony was simultaneously held in 21 other countries that fought for the South Korean side against invading North Korea under the U.N. flag in the three-year conflict. (Yonhap)
A ROK Drop favorite Robert Neff has a good love story published in the Korea Times about a US Marine working in the US Embassy in Seoul during the time of the Korean War:
George Lampman and Lee Sook-ei in the 1950s / Courtesy of Robert Neff collection
Recently, The Korea Times had the opportunity to interview George V.Lampman who, as a young Marine, was assigned to the American Embassy from 1949 to 1951. Despite being 90, Lampman has a youthful, if not mischievous, twinkle in his eyes, and is quick to smile as he recalls his time in Korea.
He arrived in Korea on Jan.9, 1949, as part of the security detachment of the American Embassy in Seoul.It was a relatively easy assignment ― checking identification at the entrance of the embassy (located in the Bando Hotel, now the site of downtown Seoul’s Lotte Hotel) and staying out of trouble.The first part was easy but the second part was a little more difficult.
But things changed when Lee Sook-ei, a young Korean woman working in the communication section of the embassy, caught his attention.She was the most beautiful woman he had ever seen.In the beginning their meetings were rather controlled: “Maybe a once-a-week dinner at a close-by Chinese restaurant and an occasional conversation in the Embassy lobby while we were both on breaks.But never a date between just the two of us.”
Eventually their attraction to one another overcame the potential disapproval of her mother and they began dating.But this was cut short by the evacuation of the embassy when the Korean War started on June 25, 1950. [Korea Times]
An honor guard carrying the portrait of the late French Korean War veteran Jean Le Houx and a box containing his ashes enters Incheon airport, west of Seoul, on Nov. 1, 2017. Le Houx, who took part in the 1950-53 Korean War, died at 84 in December 2016 and left a will expressing his wish to be buried in South Korea. Soldiers from France and 15 other nations fought for South Korea against invading North Korea under the U.N. flag during the war. (Yonhap)
A U.S. veteran of the 1950-53 Korean War salutes in front of the graves of deceased fellow soldiers at the U.N. Memorial Cemetery in Busan, 453 kilometers southeast of Seoul, on Oct. 24, 2017, the 72nd United Nations Day. A total of 2,300 people are interred at the cemetery that honors U.N.-led coalition forces who fought with the South in the conflict. (Yonhap)
Here is an interesting story from the Korean War that I had not heard of before about an orphaned baby that was taken aboard and cared for by sailors on a US ship:
Father Riley looks on as Genevieve Keenan holds her new son in 1953.
Life could only get better for Danny Keenan after a Navy medic found him as an abandoned infant on the steps of an infirmary at a U.S. base in South Korea in 1953.
His luck changed so much for the better that it must have rubbed off on a gambling chaplain who won him a Korean passport in a poker game, wagering a bottle of the captain’s best scotch as the final, winning bet.
Before that, however, it appeared as though the baby might die of neglect in an orphanage, until Navy seamen, including two from La Crosse, took him aboard the USS Point Cruz (CVE 119) and doted on him.
“I never would have survived if not for the intervention of the skipper and the men of the Point Cruz,” the 64-year-old Keenan said during an interview last week in La Crosse. [Stars & Stripes]
You can read the rest at the link, but the baby was eventually adopted by a Navy surgeon and brought back to the US where he became Danny Keenan who attended Washington State University and became a sports journalist.
