Department of the Army Historical Summary: FY 1975


Operational Forces

The Army's authorized military strength for fiscal year 1975 was a stable 785,000. The ratio of combat to support forces increased considerably as the Army moved ahead with its plan to increase the number of active Army combat divisions from thirteen to sixteen. Implementation of the sixteen-division structure, originally scheduled for completion by fiscal year 1978, was advanced to the end of fiscal year 1977 due to the success in reducing the size and number of Army headquarters and eliminating combat support spaces in Europe to meet the dictates of Congress and the Department of Defense. Two of the new divisions will be infantry units—the 7th Infantry Division stationed at Fort Ord, California, and the 24th Infantry Division, which will be located at Fort Stewart, Georgia. The third new division, the 5th Infantry Division (Mechanized), will be stationed at Fort Polk, Louisiana. The latest plans call for the 5th Infantry Division and the 24th Infantry Division each to have three active Army brigades and one affiliated reserve component brigade. The 7th Infantry Division will contain two active Army brigades and one reserve component round-out brigade.

Major changes in the Army force structure during the past year included the activation of one division (less one brigade), three separate brigades, and eleven battalions, including the second of three planned Ranger battalions. The 7th Infantry Division, less certain organic elements, was activated at Fort Ord, and the 1st Brigade, 5th Infantry Division and the 1st Brigade, 24th Infantry Division were activated as separate units at Fort Polk and Fort Stewart. The 6th Cavalry Brigade (Air Combat) was formed from the air cavalry brigades of the 1st Cavalry Division. When a divisional brigade was then reformed with armor units, the reorganization of the 1st Cavalry Division to an armored configuration was complete. In the 2d Armored Division, a fourth brigade was organized to compensate for the temporary loss of the third brigade, which was sent to Europe.

There were no major unit inactivations within the Army during the past year. A number of small units, however, were dropped from the troop list, including one airmobile battalion,


two field artillery battalions (Honest John), and three assault helicopter companies.

In May 1974 the Chief of Staff approved a proposal to modify the mission, organization, equipment, and doctrine of the engineer construction battalion, which will be renamed the combat engineer battalion (heavy). The conversion, not to take place until next year, will provide the Army with units that can perform combat engineering and heavy construction missions and fight as infantry.

The House Appropriations Committee in November 1974 began an inquiry on the feasibility of unit rotation as an alternative to the individual overseas replacement system. Interested in unit rotation as a possible way to reduce greatly the number of military dependents overseas and thereby achieve substantial savings, the committee had its staff members visit major United States and overseas commands during the last half of the fiscal year to gather field data. Meanwhile, the Department of Defense coordinated efforts by the Army and Air Force to write staff studies on unit rotation. Completing its study in May 1975, the Army concluded that unit rotation would not be a practical alternative for the individual replacement system because of the geographical distribution of interchangeable units. It would not reduce costs; instead, it would decrease unit readiness and cause personnel problems. The Army recommended that further consideration of unit rotation await the evaluation of the limited rotation program under way to boost the combat capability of U.S. forces in Europe.

Europe and the Middle East

The Nunn Amendment to the fiscal year 1975 Military Appropriation Act (Public Law 93-365) required the Secretary of Defense to reduce noncombat forces in Europe by 18,000 troops no later than 30 June 1976. Not less than one-third of the reduction was to be completed by the end of fiscal year 1975. The amendment also authorized the Secretary of Defense to increase combat forces in Europe by an amount equal to reductions made in noncombat forces.

Responding to the Nunn Amendment, the Army reduced the number of support spaces in Europe by 6,000, raised manning levels in selected European-based combat units, and on 14 March 1975 began deployment of the 3d Brigade, 2d Armored Division from Fort Hood, Texas, to the Federal


Republic of Germany. Stationing plans for the brigade, called Brigade 75, were unique. Only 664 members of the brigade headquarters and its support battalion will be stationed in Europe. The remainder of the brigade, consisting of a tank battalion, two infantry battalions, a field artillery battalion, a cavalry troop, and an engineer company, will rotate between their bases in the United States and Europe, spending six months at a time overseas. Rotation will be scheduled so that an effective brigade is always on hand in Europe.

This year's REFORGER exercise took place during the period 30 September-21 November 1974. In the first phase of the three-part exercise, the U.S. Air Force, using C-5 and C-141 aircraft, transported over 11,400 soldiers from the 1st Infantry Division, the 212th Artillery Group, the 3d Armored Cavalry Regiment, and other units based in the United States to airfields in the Federal Republic of Germany. The units received prepositioned sets of equipment and then moved to assembly areas. CERTAIN PLEDGE, the field training phase of REFORGER, involved the airlifted units, as well as U.S. Army, Europe; German; and Canadian forces in extensive offensive and defensive exercises during the period 10-23 October 1974. The final phase began on 24 October 1974 when the airlifted units test-fired large caliber weapons and performed the maintenance necessary to prepare the prepositioned stocks for storage. During this phase tactical operations center personnel from the airlifted units participated in command post exercise CERTAIN RESOLVE. Afterward the units departed Nurnberg and Ramstein Air Force bases and returned to their home stations by 21 November 1974.

During fiscal year 1975 the Army continued as the Department of Defense executive agent for logistic support to United Nations observation and peacekeeping forces in the Middle East. These comprised the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO), the United Nations Emergency Force, and the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force. The Army also supported the thirty-six U.S. military observers (nineteen Army, six Marine Corps, six Air Force, and five Navy) who served the truce supervision organization. The U.S. observers were active in Egypt, Israel, Lebanon, Jordan, and Syria, and six of them occupied UNTSO staff positions. The United States concurred in a Soviet proposal to downgrade the senior American and Soviet positions within UNTSO to the grade of lieutenant colonel.


The Pacific and the Far East

In the spring of 1975 world attention focused on the fall of Cambodia and South Vietnam to Communist-supported insurgent movements and invasion. On 12 April 1975 the last U.S. diplomatic and military personnel left Phnom Penh, Cambodia, just before the Khmer Rouge takeover. The hurried evacuation of Americans from Saigon and the fall of the South Vietnamese government to the Viet Cong and its North Vietnamese allies followed less than three weeks later. At the end of the fiscal year the coalition government in Laos continued its tenuous hold over that country, but a takeover by the Communist Pathet Lao appeared imminent.

In neighboring Thailand, the Army decreased its strength, mainly in logistic support units, from slightly over 4,000 at the beginning of the fiscal year to about 3,000 by 30 June 1975. As part of the decrease, the U.S. Army Support Command, Thailand, a major Army command, was discontinued on 1 July 1974. Its functions were assumed by the U.S. Military Assistance Command, Thailand, Support Group, a joint organization charged with providing administrative and logistic support to all U.S. military forces in Thailand and to selected U.S. government agencies in Southeast Asia. This arrangement will be temporary, however, since the government of Thailand has requested that U.S. military forces leave the country by March 1976.

The Eighth Army and U.S. Army, Japan, became major commands upon the termination of U.S. Army, Pacific, on 31 December 1974. Both commands continued as Army components of unified commands. U.S. Army Support Command, Hawaii, a subordinate headquarters of U.S. Army Forces Command, was made responsible for Army forces stationed on Hawaii, Guam, and Johnston Island. Its commander also headed U.S. Army Commander-in-Chief, Pacific, Support Group, a field operation under the proponency of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and Plans, that coordinated actions in the Pacific affecting more than one major Army command.

The Western Hemisphere

U.S. Army, Alaska, was officially discontinued on 31 December 1974. Six months earlier, on 1 July 1974, U.S. Army Forces Command had assumed control of Army troop units in


Alaska, including the 172d Infantry Brigade. The U.S. Army Health Services Command took over responsibility of Army nontactical medical units and facilities (not attached to combat units), and the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command assumed selected training and doctrine functions that were previously performed by U.S. Army, Alaska.

Far to the south, similar changes in command relationships were completed in the Canal Zone. Headquarters, U.S. Army Southern Command, was disestablished on 31 December 1974. The 193d Infantry Brigade took over Army component responsibilities of the unified command and installation management functions. The Training and Doctrine Command assumed responsibility for the Army Reserve officer training program in the Canal Zone as well as other training and doctrinal functions. Earlier, nontactical medical units and facilities began reporting directly to the Health Services Command, while the Army Communications Command continued to oversee communications activities in the Canal Zone.

Of the specialized support units that comprised the Security Assistance Force in Latin America at the beginning of the fiscal year, only the 3d Battalion, 7th Special Forces Group (Airborne), remained in the Canal Zone on 30 June 1975. The 9th Psychological Operations Battalion, 146th Engineer Detachment, 550th Military Police Detachment, and 610th Military Intelligence Detachment were inactivated in December 1974 as part of the Army-wide reduction in personnel. Army units in the United States will replace mobile training teams previously drawn from Canal Zone units in providing security assistance support to Latin American countries.

Within the United States, the Army continued to phase out its Nike Hercules air defense batteries. By the close of fiscal year 1975, thirty-five of the forty-eight batteries had been inactivated, including the twenty-seven batteries in the Army National Guard. The Army also discontinued its Air Defense Command on 4 January 1975 and assigned the residual forces and missions to the Forces Command and the Ballistic Missile Defense Program Manager.

Army installations in the United States received a surge of applications for political asylum from the 91 Vietnamese and 132 Cambodian military personnel who were attending Army schools at the time their governments fell. The trainees were permitted to stay, and at the close of the fiscal year arrangements were nearing completion to transfer them to local jurisdictions where they could receive federal assistance under


the $405 million refugee settlement program signed by President Ford on 21 May 1975.


The readiness of the Army continued to improve during fiscal year 1975. The number of units attaining prescribed readiness objectives stood at 57 percent at year's end, as compared to 54 percent the year before, a gain realized in spite of a slight decline in logistical readiness. In this particular area, there was a drop from 93 percent to 90 percent in units having their authorized level of equipment, and equipment status goals (including the condition of equipment as well as its availability) were met by 78 percent of the units reporting, down 2 percentage points from the previous year. All active Army combat divisions were judged capable of performing their wartime missions. Those divisions located in the United States were rated fully ready or substantially ready; divisions stationed in Europe were rated substantially ready. In the Pacific, the division in Hawaii and the division in Korea, with its Korean Army augmentation, were considered ready to perform their assigned missions.

The readiness of the reserve components also improved during the past year, especially in the area of training, where increased active Army participation proved beneficial. Equipment levels rose, but shortages still existed and the influx of modern equipment actually decreased due to unprogrammed diversions to meet high priority requirements elsewhere.

In December 1974 the Vice Chief of Staff directed the Army staff to analyze the operational readiness of the Army and to find out what should be done to reach prescribed readiness goals. The analysis, which received the name OMNIBUS, involved an examination of the Army's force structure and its ability to mobilize, deploy to Europe, and sustain itself in combat. OMNIBUS has since evolved into a computer-assisted analysis (Force Readiness Analysis System) that will develop conclusions on the Army's readiness and recommendations to improve it on an annual basis. These recommendations will be incorporated with those of the Total Force Analysis in each publication of the Program Objective Memorandum.

Another management tool, the Materiel Assistance Designated Report, was developed to augment unit readiness reports. Unit commanders prepare the materiel assistance reports, which the U.S. Army Materiel Command uses in


scheduling delivery of equipment and spare parts to needy units in order to bring their logistical readiness condition to authorized levels. A study has also been started to determine requirements for a fifteen- and thirty-day supply of spare and repair parts to support combat operations following mobilization.

Command and Control

The Army's Tactical Command and Control Program, formerly titled the Integrated Battlefield Control System, will enable ground commanders to direct combat operations more effectively in the 1982-85 time frame. Using an integrated management structure composed of representatives from the Department of the Army and selected Army commands, the program involves an evolutionary, iterative process of interacting studies, tests, and computer systems. During fiscal year 1975 two components of the program, the Field Artillery Tactical Fire Direction System and the Air Defense Command and Control System, underwent extensive developmental and operational tests and were being produced in limited quantities for further testing. After these tests, the Army will decide whether to equip all its tactical forces with these systems.

Other components of the Tactical Command and Control Program under development include the tactical operations system (TOS) and a system for the Army Security Agency Control and Analysis Center. A prototype of the latter was under construction as the fiscal year ended. For the former, potential users were refining requirements in preparation for the full-scale engineering phase of development. Different versions of TOS will be tested at division level in order to compare the merits of an automated system with a manual one.

The Army also participated in two joint tactical command and control programs, the Tactical Air Control Systems/Tactical Air Defense Systems (TAGS/TADS) Interoperability Program and the joint Interoperability of Tactical Command and Control Systems in Support of Ground and Amphibious Military Operations (GAMO) Program. The objective of these programs is to develop and test joint message standards and to adapt the command and control systems of the military services so that information can be interchanged. During the past fiscal year, the AN/TSQ-73 had the best operational record of all the systems used in TACS/TADS tests. Meanwhile, activity in the GAMO program concentrated on technical design and the


development of test plans. The GAMO Joint Interface Test Force was established in June 1975 to conduct compatibility and interoperability tests.


Field training and command post exercises conducted under the joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS) Directed/Coordinated Exercise Program have recently been emphasized in training and in testing strategic mobility capabilities. In fiscal year 1975, the JCS approved six directed exercises relating to strategic mobility or of major scope and thirty coordinated exercises involving more than one unified command or military service. The Army planned to participate in five of the directed exercises and twenty-one of the coordinated exercises, but because of budgetary and airlift constraints, took part in only three directed exercises, REFORGER 74, GALLANT SHIELD 75, and SOLID SHIELD 75, and thirteen coordinated exercises. Because of these constraints, future programs will probably include more command post exercises and fewer but larger field training exercises involving all the unified commands.

Civil Affairs, Psychological Operations, and Special Forces

Two changes in the civil affairs structure of the active Army were completed during fiscal year 1975. The 3d Civil Affairs Group in Panama was inactivated in December 1975, and the civil affairs units stationed at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, were organized into a single, 115-man unit, the 96th Civil Affairs Battalion. The only civil affairs unit still in the active Army, the 96th can support a deployment package of up to corps size.

The long delayed reorganization of Army Reserve civil affairs units under the H-Series modified tables of organization and equipment went into effect on 1 June 1975. The aggregate strength of the new civil affairs structure was 6,938 as compared to 6,964 before. Changes in unit designations are shown in the following table:

Old Designation

H-Series Designation

No. of Units

Civil Affairs Area A

Civil Affairs Command


Civil Affairs Area B

Civil Affairs Brigade


Civil Affairs Group

Civil Affairs Group


Civil Affairs Company

Civil Affairs Company

Inactivation of the 5th Psychological Operations (PSYOP) Battalion, located at Boeblingen, Germany, and the 9th PSYOP Battalion in the Panama Canal Zone left the 4th PSYOP Group


at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, as the only active Army psychological operations unit. The latter was reorganized, and with three battalions it will take over the responsibilities of the two inactivated groups and in addition will act as the worldwide psychological operations augmentation unit. Additional organizational changes will be made to place the 4th's 50-kilowatt radio broadcast and printing resources within group headquarters. The group's three battalions will have light mobile and medium mobile printing equipment as well as mobile speakers and audiovisual equipment.

Throughout the period of reorganization the 4th PSYOP Group maintained readiness to respond to worldwide contingencies, supported training activities at the John F. Kennedy Center for Military Assistance, and operated the PSYOP Automated Management Information System (PAMIS). It also put the Foreign Media Analysis (FMA) subsystem into limited operation for training and evaluation and assumed the FMA coding input function that had been performed by the PAMIS Detachment on Okinawa before inactivation in December 1974.

Elements of the 4th PSYOP Group deployed to Guam; Fort Chaffee, Arkansas; Eglin Air Force Base, Florida; and Fort Indiantown Gap, Pennsylvania, in support of Operation New Arrivals, and participated in two joint exercises, SOLID SHIELD 75 and GALLANT SHIELD 75.

In other matters related to PAMIS subsystems, operational coverage of the PSYOP Foreign Area Data Subsystem was expanded to twelve countries, and an in-process review committee studied the PSYOP Effects Analysis Subsystem, which continued under development throughout the year. A committee recommendation on a software program for portions of the subsystem was scheduled for fiscal year 1976.

Special Forces followed the pattern set by the Army as a whole and modified their tables of organization to improve the ratio of combat support within each group. The number of operational detachments (A Teams) authorized each special forces battalion rose from fifteen to eighteen, but authorized detachment strength declined from fourteen to twelve men. Headquarters company (B Team) strength was reduced from twenty-four to five. The support battalion organic to each special forces group was replaced by separate signal and service companies, and the battalion headquarters was eliminated. The 5th and 7th Special Forces Groups have already converted to the new table of organization. The 10th Special Forces Group will change in November 1975. The two Army National Guard


and two Army Reserve special forces groups will reorganize later in fiscal year 1976. Personnel savings resulting from the reorganization of special forces units will total approximately seven hundred in the active Army and one thousand in the reserve components.

Chemical, Biological, and Nuclear Matters

On 22 January 1975 President Ford signed the instruments of ratification for the 1975 Geneva Protocol on the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare. Since most parties to the protocol, including the United States, reserved the right to retaliate against a chemical attack with like weapons, the agreement did not remove the threat of chemical warfare. Nor did it prohibit the development, production, and stockpiling of lethal chemical weapons. The protocol, however, may deter the first use of chemical weapons and ease the way for more effective arms control measures.

American policy, unilaterally announced in 1969, has been consistent with what came to be embodied in the Geneva Protocol. That policy is based upon deterring the use of chemical weapons by other nations and being able to retaliate with chemical weapons should deterrence fail. The chemical warfare programs are designed to assure the Army's ability to survive initial chemical attacks, operate effectively in a toxic environment, and retaliate with chemical weapons upon receipt of proper authorization. A review of the Army's chemical warfare capability and nuclear-biological-chemical defense training was completed in January 1975. The review highlighted training equipment and organization as areas that require substantial improvement.

The Army continued the chemical demilitarization of unserviceable and excess toxic munitions. Disposal of the biological stockpile, some defective chemical rockets, excess bulk mustard, and bulk GB nerve agents was completed during the year. Major projects that continued into fiscal year 1976 included disposal of bulk GB, phosgene agents, and munitions at Rocky Mountain Arsenal, Colorado; disposal of leaking munitions now encased in sealed metal containers; and disposal of obsolete identification and training sets.

President Ford issued an Executive Order on 8 April 1975 that renounced the first use of herbicides in wartime, except for control of vegetation within U.S. bases and installations or


around their immediate defensive perimeters. The Executive Order also prohibited the first use of riot control agents in wartime, except for defensive operations such as riot control in areas under U.S. military control, including prisoner of war compounds; situations in which civilians are used to disguise or screen enemy attacks and use of riot control agents would reduce civilian casualties; the rescue of downed aircrews and passengers in remote areas; the recovery of escaping prisoners of war; and the protection of convoys from civil disturbances and attacks by terrorists and partisans in rear areas. The Executive Order specifically prohibited the wartime use of any herbicide and riot control agent without prior approval by the President, but did not apply to peacetime use on U.S. bases for protection and security.

The 1973 Biological Weapons Convention entered into force on 26 March 1975 following ratification by the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States. The convention prohibited the development, production, and stock­piling of bacteriological toxins, as well as associated weapons and equipment. It also required each ratifying government to destroy or divert to peaceful purposes all prohibited toxins and associated weaponry. The Army, in compliance with a policy announced in 1969, completed destruction of all biological offensive warfare agents in 1973.

In regard to nuclear matters, the Army completed a survey of its nuclear storage sites and began planning to close a number of them and to strengthen others against terrorists and saboteurs through the installation of new intrusion detection systems and the improvement of security forces. The Army also held its first nuclear surety conference, which brought together representatives of the general staffs, operational commands, and technical agencies to exchange views on nuclear weapons employment, safety, and security.

On 28 May 1975, the Vice Chief of Staff approved the establishment of a focal point for nuclear matters within the Office, Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and Plans, and the formation of the Nuclear Munitions Project Office and the Army Nuclear Agency. These changes followed a review of goals, programs, and staff organization to determine ways to draw all nuclear matters together into a coordinated program that could be presented adequately in Department of Defense budget deliberations and congressional hearings. A revised national nuclear strategy placed increased reliance upon the Army's tactical nuclear capabilities, and the review was


prompted by difficulties the Army experienced in presenting its case for a new employment doctrine, new force goals, and modernization programs.

Military Support to Civilian Authorities

The Army expanded its assistance to civilian authorities with the publication on 30 October 1974 of Chief of Staff Memorandum 74-360-69, Army Support to Other Governmental Agencies for the National Bicentennial. The memorandum designated the Director of Military Support as Army staff coordinator for all Bicentennial-related requests from other governmental agencies, except for requests pertaining to ceremonies and public information activities. These exceptions, as well as overall Army participation in the Bicentennial, were made the responsibility of the Chief of Information. Examples of assistance by the Director of Military Support included arranging for the use of rail facilities at Cameron Station, Virginia, to assemble and prepare the Freedom Train for its tour across the United States and lending Army field lighting equipment for the Estonian-American Salute to the Bicentennial.

On 24 June 1975 the Secretary of the Army, acting as executive agent for the Secretary of Defense, and the president of the American National Red Cross signed a memorandum of understanding. This new document, which superseded a 1966 agreement, pledged the support of all Defense components to the Red Cross during natural disasters and emergencies. On June 1975 a new memorandum of understanding between the Department of Defense and the departments of Agriculture and Interior for mutual support in fire emergencies replaced a 1971 Defense-Agriculture memorandum. This new agreement included the Department of the Interior as a major signatory because of Interior's involvement in the Boise Interagency Fire Center, which was formed in 1972. The center is an interagency organization supported by the Bureau of Land Management, the Forest Service, and the National Weather Service and provides for pooling resources and centralizing fire-fighting service for lands under the jurisdiction of the supporting agencies.

As the Army staff agency charged with coordinating support for the U.S. Secret Service, the Directorate of Military Support processed 791 requests for assistance during fiscal


year 1975. These requests pertained primarily to explosive disposal, medical service, and aircraft and vehicle support. In addition, the Army was charged with providing communications support to the Secret Service during the 1976 presidential campaign.

Besides helping the Secret Service, Army explosive ordnance disposal (EOD) units responded to a large number of requests from other civil authorities. They eliminated hazards associated with bomb threats, deactivated improvised explosive devices, assisted at transportation accidents involving explosives, and disposed of war souvenirs. The Army is reorganizing its EOD units into detachment teams to employ more effectively personnel with special skills and to increase technical proficiency.

In fiscal year 1975, the Directorate of Military Support received five requests for assistance from the U.S. Customs Service. These involved the transfer or procurement of sensor equipment, the provision of explosives for training, and the loan of experimental night vision equipment. All requests were met, except for the experimental night vision equipment which was still undergoing test and evaluation. In December 1974 the Department of the Army sent a message to the field that authorized emergency evacuation services for the Customs Service.

Support to the Drug Enforcement Administration during the year consisted of the loan of a centrifugal pump, two pairs of night vision goggles, and miscellaneous expendable supplies provided under local support agreements. Meanwhile, sixteen M16 rifles on loan since the previous fiscal year were returned to the Army.

At the close of fiscal year 1975, sixteen installations were participating in the Military Assistance to Safety and Traffic Program, and one other installation was about to begin. Previously, the Department of Defense prepared a directive covering the use of military helicopters and personnel to support the program, as authorized by Public Law 93-155, and a comparable Army regulation was written and staffed.

The Director of Military Support continued to monitor and manage Department of Defense assistance to the District of Columbia in combating crime. Support during the year consisted of providing aviation fuel from Andrews Air Force Base, Maryland, lending fuel trucks, and training District of Columbia police officers in the use of the polygraph at the Army Military Police School, Fort Gordon, Georgia.


Security Assistance

For nearly a quarter of a century the Army has participated in U.S. security assistance programs without significantly decreasing its readiness for war. In 1973, however, large quantities of materiel and services were taken from Army resources and furnished to South Vietnam; Israel and other Mideast countries received similar help. Critical shortages were soon apparent. Taking the initiative to alleviate these shortages, the Army, with the support of the Department of Defense, asked Congress for a $300 million inventory replenishment fund, but congressional committees struck the item from the budget request.

In recent studies on the impact of renewed demands for materiel to meet urgent international requirements, the Army concluded that it could supply many items with little loss in readiness, but that certain items remained critical. Confirming these critical shortages, the General Accounting Office recommended that Congress provide relief to the Department of Defense.

As the effects of security assistance on readiness persisted, the Army made pertinent organizational changes. Following an August 1974 evaluation of the Army staff's role in security assistance matters, the Director of International Logistics, Office, Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics, was designated as the staff's primary point of contact. The Department of Defense, meanwhile, called for a review of the foreign military sales portion of the security assistance program. The review identified a requirement for 1,095 additional personnel for the Army Materiel Command, the Training and Doctrine Command, and the Army staff in order to put foreign military sales on a proper footing. Satisfying this need will be difficult in light of tight fiscal year 1976 manpower ceilings.

Improved management of the security assistance program was also the object of a study contracted out by the Army to the Stanford Research Institute, which was published in January 1975. The study, "An Analytical Approach for Assessing Combat Service Support and Related Security Assistance Requirements," should prove helpful in determining appropriate program levels for recipient countries.

Aid to Indochina during fiscal year 1975 consisted of $700 million appropriated under the Defense Assistance, Vietnam, Program; $30 million for Laos under the Military Assistance Program (MAP); and $275 million in MAP funds for Cam-


bodia. The presidential request for an additional $300 million for Vietnam and $222 million for Cambodia was before Congress when those countries fell.

Although the full effect of Communist victories in Indochina on security assistance programs elsewhere has yet to be seen, a number of countries asked for additional aid to meet the growing threat of Communist and other insurgent factions. On the other hand, several countries expressed doubts about the firmness of U.S. commitments to their security and were considering closer ties with their Communist neighbors.

Security assistance to Latin America during fiscal year 1975 continued to shift from grant aid to foreign military sales, although military assistance training was funded for most countries at only slightly reduced levels. As Latin American countries continued to modernize their armed forces, foreign military sales requests increased to such an extent that at times the United States was unable to comply; Peru was an example. Elsewhere there were other problems. Congress discontinued aid to Chile, and in Ecuador another fishing incident caused a seven-month suspension in the recently reinstated military assistance program.

On 20 May 1975 the congressionally imposed $40 million ceiling on foreign military sales to African nations was lifted to permit sales credits and MAP training for Kenya. Restrictions were also lifted on such items as medium tanks and Vulcan, Chaparral, and TOW missiles for selected countries. This shift in policy will allow greater flexibility in the use of security assistance as a foreign policy instrument. Several African countries, particularly those with U.S. installations, became increasingly interested in receiving equipment and materiel under the foreign military sales program.

Training of foreign personnel by the Army again increased, although the emphasis shifted from MAP training to that paid for under the foreign military sales program. The following table shows the training provided in the past fiscal year.

Support to Vietnamese Refugees

On 1 April 1975 the Department of State requested Army help in providing temporary care for Vietnamese and Cambodian orphans who would arrive in the United States shortly. One day later the Secretary of the Army pledged his cooperation and designated the Director of Military Support to coordinate Army participation in Operation BABYLIFT. On 3



Latin America
CONUS Schools




Overseas Schools








Mobile Training

Teams (man-years)

Field Training

Service (man-years)

Training for Other Departments




Total Training Dollar Value (in millions of dollars)





a Australia, UK, Canada

April 1975, the first airlifted orphans arrived at the Presidio of San Francisco. Afterward, Fort Benning, Georgia, and Fort Lewis, Washington, served as reception centers. In all, the Army provided temporary housing and care for 1,853 of the 2,715 orphans evacuated to the United States before turning them over to voluntary adoption agencies.

On 18 April 1975 an interagency task force headed by the State Department was organized to handle the influx of military and political refugees from Indochina. A two-phased operation was developed. Operation NEW LIFE would deal with the evacuation of refugees to processing centers in the Pacific, where they would be medically screened and treated and administratively processed. Operation NEW ARRIVALS would cover their later movement to the United States and assimilation into American society. The Army's role would be to receive, process, and otherwise support the refugees until the State Department and other civilian agencies had arranged their resettlement.

On 22 April the Joint Chiefs of Staff directed the establishment of refugee camps on Guam. In response, the Army deployed approximately 2,000 support troops to Guam and set up a tent city capable of housing more than 50,000 refugees. On 30 April the Joint Chiefs directed the Army to open Fort Chaffee, Arkansas, and establish a refugee center there.


Twenty-four hours after notification, all twenty-seven support units, totaling approximately 1,800 troops had arrived at Fort Chaffee and had it ready for operation. The first group of refugees arrived on 2 May. Later in May a second refugee center was established at Fort Indiantown Gap, Pennsylvania.

Food service support of Operation NEW ARRIVALS at Fort Chaffee at first involved 315 Army cooks feeding 25,000 persons in thirty dining facilities. Later, contractual arrangements were made for meals. Based upon the Fort Chaffee experience, the Army used contractors from the beginning of operations at Fort Indiantown Gap, where 16,000 refugees were fed in fifteen contractor-operated dining facilities.

On 4 June 1975, the joint Refugee Information Clearing Office was established to provide information to potential sponsors of refugee families; locate spouses, relatives, and friends among the refugees; and deal with other refugee matters. The office was composed of Army, Air Force, Navy, and Marine elements, and its staff consisted primarily of reserve personnel on short, active duty for training tours.

At the close of fiscal year 1975, Army support of refugee operations had not abated. The refugee centers were expected to continue operations through December 1975; the joint office should remain active for some time afterward.

International Humanitarian Law

The second session of the Diplomatic Conference on the Law of War met at Geneva, Switzerland, from 3 February to 18 April 1975. Sponsored by the International Committee of the Red Cross, the conference convened to consider two draft protocols designed to update the Geneva Conventions of 1949. Unlike the first session, the second was not preoccupied with divisive political issues, and the work of the conference was carried out in a spirit of cooperation. Positions favored by the United States on evacuating wounded from the battlefield and providing greater safeguards to civilians caught up in armed conflicts were advanced by conference action on the first protocol. The status of the second protocol, which dealt with internal armed conflicts, was not as encouraging, and it seemed doubtful that an effective agreement could be reached. The third session of the Diplomatic Conference on the Law of War is scheduled for 21 April to 11 June 1976 in Geneva. There is a reasonable chance that this session will conclude the substantive work of the conference.


In recent years, there has been growing concern about the legality of some of the weapons in today's arsenals. Much of this debate has focused on weapons used by the U.S. armed forces, in part because of the attention given to the conflict in Vietnam, but also because modern technology has permitted the creation of weapons that are a departure from older, more familiar ones.

This concern and the fact that the United States has entered into a number of arms control agreements prompted the Department of Defense to publish Instruction 5500.15 on 16 October 1974. The instruction required the Judge Advocate General of each military service to review all weapons to insure that their use in armed conflict would be consistent with the obligations assumed by the United States. The instruction further required a review at each stage of acquisition or procurement and prior to the award of an initial contract for production.

To comply with the requirement, Army Regulation 15-14, Systems Acquisition Review Council Procedures, was amended to require a legal review before the start of full-scale engineering development and again before initial production. Additionally, Army Regulation 70-1, Army Research, Development, and Acquisition, was changed to require the responsible Army agency to coordinate early in the development cycle, and in any event, prior to engineering development, with the Office of The Judge Advocate General to insure that weapons being developed or acquired are in conformance with international law.



Go to:

Previous Chapter

Next Chapter

Return to Table of Contents

Search CMH Online
Last updated 21 September 2004