Historical Documents Index
I
Home
I Store I Video Guides
I Customer Service
Need
to print this document? Go to "Print Preview" in your web browser and
select "Shrink to Fit."
General Douglas MacArthur’s
“Old Soldiers Never Die” Farewell Address to Congress

NOTE: General Douglas
MacArthur, hero of two world wars, once again answered the call to duty (in his
seventies), leading United States and United Nations forces in the Korean War.
His victory at Inchon secured his legend as one of the greatest military commanders
in history. However, after communist China entered the war on behalf of North
Korea, MacArthur's request to take the war into China was refused by President Harry
Truman. As Congress began deliberating on whether to back the general's plan,
President Truman removed the general from command. Upon his return to the
United States, MacArthur was invited to address a joint session of Congress.
He prophetically foretold of communism's spread to Indochina (Vietnam, Cambodia,
and Laos), as well as China's encroachment of Tibet. (Also note that Taiwan
was called Formosa at that time.) This speech is considered one of most memorable
orations made on the floor of Congress.
April 19, 1951
Mr. President, Mr. Speaker, and Distinguished
Members of the Congress:
I stand on this rostrum with a sense of deep humility and great pride -- humility
in the wake of those great American architects of our history who have stood here
before me; pride in the reflection that this forum of legislative debate represents
human liberty in the purest form yet devised. Here are centered the hopes and aspirations
and faith of the entire human race. I do not stand here as advocate for any partisan
cause, for the issues are fundamental and reach quite beyond the realm of partisan
consideration. They must be resolved on the highest plane of national interest if
our course is to prove sound and our future protected. I trust, therefore, that
you will do me the justice of receiving that which I have to say as solely expressing
the considered viewpoint of a fellow American.
I address you with neither rancor nor bitterness in the fading twilight of life,
with but one purpose in mind: to serve my country. The issues are global and so
interlocked that to consider the problems of one sector, oblivious to those of another,
is but to court disaster for the whole. While Asia is commonly referred to as the
Gateway to Europe, it is no less true that Europe is the Gateway to Asia, and the
broad influence of the one cannot fail to have its impact upon the other. There
are those who claim our strength is inadequate to protect on both fronts, that we
cannot divide our effort. I can think of no greater expression of defeatism. If
a potential enemy can divide his strength on two fronts, it is for us to counter
his effort. The Communist threat is a global one. Its successful advance in one
sector threatens the destruction of every other sector. You can not appease or otherwise
surrender to communism in Asia without simultaneously undermining our efforts to
halt its advance in Europe.
Beyond pointing out these general truisms, I shall confine my discussion to the
general areas of Asia. Before one may objectively assess the situation now existing
there, he must comprehend something of Asia's past and the revolutionary changes
which have marked her course up to the present. Long exploited by the so-called
colonial powers, with little opportunity to achieve any degree of social justice,
individual dignity, or a higher standard of life such as guided our own noble administration
in the Philippines, the peoples of Asia found their opportunity in the war just
past to throw off the shackles of colonialism and now see the dawn of new opportunity,
a heretofore unfelt dignity, and the self-respect of political freedom.
Mustering half of the earth's population, and 60 percent of its natural resources
these peoples are rapidly consolidating a new force, both moral and material, with
which to raise the living standard and erect adaptations of the design of modern
progress to their own distinct cultural environments. Whether one adheres to the
concept of colonization or not, this is the direction of Asian progress and it may
not be stopped. It is a corollary to the shift of the world economic frontiers as
the whole epicenter of world affairs rotates back toward the area whence it started.
In this situation, it becomes vital that our own country orient its policies in
consonance with this basic evolutionary condition rather than pursue a course blind
to the reality that the colonial era is now past and the Asian peoples covet the
right to shape their own free destiny. What they seek now is friendly guidance,
understanding, and support -- not imperious direction -- the dignity of equality
and not the shame of subjugation. Their pre-war standard of life, pitifully low,
is infinitely lower now in the devastation left in war's wake. World ideologies
play little part in Asian thinking and are little understood. What the peoples strive
for is the opportunity for a little more food in their stomachs, a little better
clothing on their backs, a little firmer roof over their heads, and the realization
of the normal nationalist urge for political freedom. These political-social conditions
have but an indirect bearing upon our own national security, but do form a backdrop
to contemporary planning which must be thoughtfully considered if we are to avoid
the pitfalls of unrealism.
Of more direct and immediately bearing upon our national security are the changes
wrought in the strategic potential of the Pacific Ocean in the course of the past
war. Prior thereto the western strategic frontier of the United States lay on the
literal line of the Americas, with an exposed island salient extending out through
Hawaii, Midway, and Guam to the Philippines. That salient proved not an outpost
of strength but an avenue of weakness along which the enemy could and did attack.
The Pacific was a potential area of advance for any predatory force intent upon
striking at the bordering land areas. All this was changed by our Pacific victory.
Our strategic frontier then shifted to embrace the entire Pacific Ocean, which became
a vast moat to protect us as long as we held it. Indeed, it acts as a protective
shield for all of the Americas and all free lands of the Pacific Ocean area. We
control it to the shores of Asia by a chain of islands extending in an arc from
the Aleutians to the Mariannas held by us and our free allies. From this island
chain we can dominate with sea and air power every Asiatic port from Vladivostok
to Singapore -- with sea and air power every port, as I said, from Vladivostok to
Singapore -- and prevent any hostile movement into the Pacific.
*Any predatory attack from Asia must be an amphibious effort.* No amphibious force
can be successful without control of the sea lanes and the air over those lanes
in its avenue of advance. With naval and air supremacy and modest ground elements
to defend bases, any major attack from continental Asia toward us or our friends
in the Pacific would be doomed to failure.
Under such conditions, the Pacific no longer represents menacing avenues of approach
for a prospective invader. It assumes, instead, the friendly aspect of a peaceful
lake. Our line of defense is a natural one and can be maintained with a minimum
of military effort and expense. It envisions no attack against anyone, nor does
it provide the bastions essential for offensive operations, but properly maintained,
would be an invincible defense against aggression. The holding of this literal defense
line in the western Pacific is entirely dependent upon holding all segments thereof;
for any major breach of that line by an unfriendly power would render vulnerable
to determined attack every other major segment.
This is a military estimate as to which I have yet to find a military leader who
will take exception. For that reason, I have strongly recommended in the past, as
a matter of military urgency, that under no circumstances must Formosa fall under
Communist control. Such an eventuality would at once threaten the freedom of the
Philippines and the loss of Japan and might well force our western frontier back
to the coast of California, Oregon and Washington.
To understand the changes which now appear upon the Chinese mainland, one must understand
the changes in Chinese character and culture over the past 50 years. China, up to
50 years ago, was completely non-homogenous, being compartmented into groups divided
against each other. The war-making tendency was almost non-existent, as they still
followed the tenets of the Confucian ideal of pacifist culture. At the turn of the
century, under the regime of Chang Tso Lin, efforts toward greater homogeneity produced
the start of a nationalist urge. This was further and more successfully developed
under the leadership of Chiang Kai-Shek, but has been brought to its greatest fruition
under the present regime to the point that it has now taken on the character of
a united nationalism of increasingly dominant, aggressive tendencies.
Through these past 50 years the Chinese people have thus become militarized in their
concepts and in their ideals. They now constitute excellent soldiers, with competent
staffs and commanders. This has produced a new and dominant power in Asia, which,
for its own purposes, is allied with Soviet Russia but which in its own concepts
and methods has become aggressively imperialistic, with a lust for expansion and
increased power normal to this type of imperialism.
There is little of the ideological concept either one way or another in the Chinese
make-up. The standard of living is so low and the capital accumulation has been
so thoroughly dissipated by war that the masses are desperate and eager to follow
any leadership which seems to promise the alleviation of local stringencies.
I have from the beginning believed that the Chinese Communists' support of the North
Koreans was the dominant one. Their interests are, at present, parallel with those
of the Soviet. But I believe that the aggressiveness recently displayed not only
in Korea but also in Indo-China and Tibet and pointing potentially toward the South
reflects predominantly the same lust for the expansion of power which has animated
every would-be conqueror since the beginning of time.
The Japanese people, since the war, have undergone the greatest reformation recorded
in modern history. With a commendable will, eagerness to learn, and marked capacity
to understand, they have, from the ashes left in war's wake, erected in Japan an
edifice dedicated to the supremacy of individual liberty and personal dignity; and
in the ensuing process there has been created a truly representative government
committed to the advance of political morality, freedom of economic enterprise,
and social justice.
Politically, economically, and socially Japan is now abreast of many free nations
of the earth and will not again fail the universal trust. That it may be counted
upon to wield a profoundly beneficial influence over the course of events in Asia
is attested by the magnificent manner in which the Japanese people have met the
recent challenge of war, unrest, and confusion surrounding them from the outside
and checked communism within their own frontiers without the slightest slackening
in their forward progress. I sent all four of our occupation divisions to the Korean
battlefront without the slightest qualms as to the effect of the resulting power
vacuum upon Japan. The results fully justified my faith. I know of no nation more
serene, orderly, and industrious, nor in which higher hopes can be entertained for
future constructive service in the advance of the human race.
Of our former ward, the Philippines, we can look forward in confidence that the
existing unrest will be corrected and a strong and healthy nation will grow in the
longer aftermath of war's terrible destructiveness. We must be patient and understanding
and never fail them -- as in our hour of need, they did not fail us. A Christian
nation, the Philippines stand as a mighty bulwark of Christianity in the Far East,
and its capacity for high moral leadership in Asia is unlimited.
On Formosa, the government of the Republic of China has had the opportunity to refute
by action much of the malicious gossip which so undermined the strength of its leadership
on the Chinese mainland. The Formosan people are receiving a just and enlightened
administration with majority representation on the organs of government, and politically,
economically, and socially they appear to be advancing along sound and constructive
lines.
With this brief insight into the surrounding areas, I now turn to the Korean conflict.
While I was not consulted prior to the President's decision to intervene in support
of the Republic of Korea, that decision from a military standpoint, proved a sound
one, as we hurled back the invader and decimated his forces. Our victory was complete,
and our objectives within reach, when Red China intervened with numerically superior
ground forces.
This created a new war and an entirely new situation, a situation not contemplated
when our forces were committed against the North Korean invaders; a situation which
called for new decisions in the diplomatic sphere to permit the realistic adjustment
of military strategy.
Such decisions have not been forthcoming.
While no man in his right mind would advocate sending our ground forces into continental
China, and such was never given a thought, the new situation did urgently demand
a drastic revision of strategic planning if our political aim was to defeat this
new enemy as we had defeated the old.
Apart from the military need, as I saw It, to neutralize the sanctuary protection
given the enemy north of the Yalu, I felt that military necessity in the conduct
of the war made necessary: first the intensification of our economic blockade against
China; two the imposition of a naval blockade against the China coast; three removal
of restrictions on air reconnaissance of China's coastal areas and of Manchuria;
four removal of restrictions on the forces of the Republic of China on Formosa,
with logistical support to contribute to their effective operations against the
common enemy.
For entertaining these views, all professionally designed to support our forces
committed to Korea and bring hostilities to an end with the least possible delay
and at a saving of countless American and allied lives, I have been severely criticized
in lay circles, principally abroad, despite my understanding that from a military
standpoint the above views have been fully shared in the past by practically every
military leader concerned with the Korean campaign, including our own Joint Chiefs
of Staff.
I called for reinforcements but was informed that reinforcements were not available.
I made clear that if not permitted to destroy the enemy built-up bases north of
the Yalu, if not permitted to utilize the friendly Chinese Force of some 600,000
men on Formosa, if not permitted to blockade the China coast to prevent the Chinese
Reds from getting succor from without, and if there were to be no hope of major
reinforcements, the position of the command from the military standpoint forbade
victory.
We could hold in Korea by constant maneuver and in an approximate area where our
supply line advantages were in balance with the supply line disadvantages of the
enemy, but we could hope at best for only an indecisive campaign with its terrible
and constant attrition upon our forces if the enemy utilized its full military potential.
I have constantly called for the new political decisions essential to a solution.
Efforts have been made to distort my position. It has been said, in effect, that
I was a warmonger. Nothing could be further from the truth. I know war as few other
men now living know it, and nothing to me is more revolting. I have long advocated
its complete abolition, as its very destructiveness on both friend and foe has rendered
it useless as a means of settling international disputes. Indeed, on the second
day of September, nineteen hundred and forty-five, just following the surrender
of the Japanese nation on the Battleship Missouri, I formally cautioned as follows:
"Men since the beginning of time have sought peace. Various methods through the
ages have been attempted to devise an international process to prevent or settle
disputes between nations. From the very start workable methods were found in so
far as individual citizens were concerned, but the mechanics of an instrumentality
of larger international scope have never been successful. Military alliances, balances
of power, Leagues of Nations, all in turn failed, leaving the only path to be by
way of the crucible of war. The utter destructiveness of war now blocks out this
alternative. We have had our last chance. If we will not devise some greater and
more equitable system, Armageddon will be at our door. The problem basically is
theological and involves a spiritual recrudescence and improvement of human character
that will synchronize with our almost matchless advances in science, art, literature,
and all material and cultural developments of the past 2000 years. It must be of
the spirit if we are to save the flesh."
But once war is forced upon us, there is no other alternative than to apply every
available means to bring it to a swift end.
War's very object is victory, not prolonged indecision.
In war there is no substitute for victory.
There are some who, for varying reasons, would appease Red China. They are blind
to history's clear lesson, for history teaches with unmistakable emphasis that appeasement
but begets new and bloodier war. It points to no single instance where this end
has justified that means, where appeasement has led to more than a sham peace. Like
blackmail, it lays the basis for new and successively greater demands until, as
in blackmail, violence becomes the only other alternative.
"Why," my soldiers asked of me, "surrender military advantages to an enemy in the
field?" I could not answer.
Some may say: to avoid spread of the conflict into an all-out war with China; others,
to avoid Soviet intervention. Neither explanation seems valid, for China is already
engaging with the maximum power it can commit, and the Soviet will not necessarily
mesh its actions with our moves. Like a cobra, any new enemy will more likely strike
whenever it feels that the relativity in military or other potential is in its favor
on a world-wide basis.
The tragedy of Korea is further heightened by the fact that its military action
is confined to its territorial limits. It condemns that nation, which it is our
purpose to save, to suffer the devastating impact of full naval and air bombardment
while the enemy's sanctuaries are fully protected from such attack and devastation.
Of the nations of the world, Korea alone, up to now, is the sole one which has risked
its all against communism. The magnificence of the courage and fortitude of the
Korean people defies description.
They have chosen to risk death rather than slavery. Their last words to me were:
"Don't scuttle the Pacific!"
I have just left your fighting sons in Korea. They have met all tests there, and
I can report to you without reservation that they are splendid in every way.
It was my constant effort to preserve them and end this savage conflict honorably
and with the least loss of time and a minimum sacrifice of life. Its growing bloodshed
has caused me the deepest anguish and anxiety.
Those gallant men will remain often in my thoughts and in my prayers always.
I am closing my 52 years of military service. When I joined the Army, even before
the turn of the century, it was the fulfillment of all of my boyish hopes and dreams.
The world has turned over many times since I took the oath on the plain at West
Point, and the hopes and dreams have long since vanished, but I still remember the
refrain of one of the most popular barrack ballads of that day which proclaimed
most proudly that "old soldiers never die; they just fade away."
And like the old soldier of that ballad, I now close my military career and just
fade away, an old soldier who tried to do his duty as God gave him the light to
see that duty.
Good Bye.
Historical Documents Index
I
Home
I Store I Video Guides
I Customer Service
|