George Ball, Undersecretary of State, Confidential Memo to President Johnson
July 1, 1965
(note: the American people did
not learn of this memo until it was published by newspapers in 1971 as part of
the Pentagon Papers – which were confidential government documents about
A COMPROMISE SOLUTION IN
(1) A Losing War: The South Vietnamese are losing the war to the Viet
Cong. No one can assure you that we can beat the Viet Cong or even force them
to the conference table on our terms, no matter how many hundred thousand white,
foreign (
No one has demonstrated that a white ground force of whatever size can win a guerrilla war--which is at the same time a civil war between Asians--in jungle terrain in the midst of a population that refuses cooperation to the white forces (and the South Vietnamese) and thus provides a great intelligence advantage to the other side. Three recent incidents vividly illustrate this point: (a) the sneak attack on the Da Nang Air Base which involved penetration of a defense parameter guarded by 9,000 Marines. This raid was possible only because of the cooperation of the local inhabitants; (b) the B-52 raid that failed to hit the Viet Cong who had obviously been tipped off; (c) the search and destroy mission of the 173rd Air Borne Brigade which spent three days looking for the Viet Cong, suffered 23 casualties, and never made contact with the enemy who had obviously gotten advance word of their assignment.
(2) The Question to Decide: Should we limit our liabilities in
The alternative--no matter what we may wish it to be--is almost certainly a
protracted war involving an open-ended commitment of
(3) Need for a Decision Now: So long as our forces are restricted to
advising and assisting the South Vietnamese, the struggle will remain a civil
war between Asian peoples. Once we deploy substantial numbers of troops in
combat it will become a war between the
The decision you face now, therefore, is crucial. Once large numbers of
Once we suffer large casualties, we will have started a well-nigh irreversible process. Our involvement will be so great that we cannot-without national humiliation-stop short of achieving our complete objectives. 0f the two possibilities I think humiliation would be more likely than the achievement of our objectives-even after we have paid terrible costs.
(4) Compromise Solution: Should we commit
(5) Costs of a Compromise Solution: The answer involves a judgment as to the
cost to the
. . . On balance, I believe we would more seriously undermine the effectiveness of our world leadership by continuing the war and deepening our involvement than by pursuing a carefully plotted course toward a compromise solution. In spite of the number of powers that have – in response to our pleading – given verbal support from feeling of loyalty and dependence, we cannot ignore the fact that the war is vastly unpopular and that our role in it is perceptively eroding the respect and confidence with which other nations regard us. We have not persuaded either our friends or allies that our further involvement is essential to the defense of freedom in the cold war.