No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 May 2009
The second annual report of the Supreme Allied Commander, Europe (SACEUR, Ridgway), to the Standing Group of the Military Committee of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization on the operations of Supreme Head-quarters, Allied Powers, Europe (SHAPE) during the period since May 1952, was released on May 30, 1953. In reviewing the changes which had been made in the period under consideration – the first year in which General Ridgway held the position of SACEUR – the report noted that “much has been done to increase our defense forces and to make them more effective” but “measured against the Soviet capacity, our progress is insufficient to give us acceptable prospect of success if attacked”. SACEUR observed that by the end of 1952, the numerical goals for NATO forces set at the Lisbon meeting of the Council had in large part been met, “although there was a substantial shortfall in planned combat effectiveness”. The outstanding deficiency of a year ago in tactical air forces had been improved both from deliveries under the United States military assistance program and from increased combat capability; nevertheless, the Supreme Commander still regarded air power as “the weakest link in our defense”. While the growth of land forces had been “encouraging” if not “satisfactory”, the same was not true of the arrangements for the supply and support of those forces. General Ridgway emphasized the complexity of the present system in which each nation was responsible for the support of its own troops; however, he felt that the situation could largely be remedied with the approval and implementation of plans submitted by SHAPE to the Standing Group in October 1952. Progress had been good, the report noted, in the infrastructure program.
1 For excerpts from the first report on SHAPE, see Department of State, Bulletin, XXVI, p. 572Google Scholar.
2 For information on the decisions of the Lasbon meeting of the NATO Council, see International Organization, VI, P. 328Google Scholar.
3 Department of State, Bulletin, XXVIII, p. 899– 904Google Scholar.
4 For information on the tenth session of the Council, see International Organization, VII, p. 164.
5 New York Times,, April 21, 1953; ibid., Apirl 23, 1953.
6 ibid., April 26, 1953.
7 ibid., April 27, 1953.
9 ibid., April 24, 1953;
10 Department of State, Bulletin, XXVIII, p. 671Google Scholar.
11 The Times (London), 04 27, 1953Google Scholar.
12 New York Times, April 26, 1953.
13 Ibid., April 25, 1953; The Times (London), 04 25, 1953Google Scholar.
14 New York Times, April 21, 1953.
15 Ibid., April 24, 1953.
16 Department of State, Bulletin, XXVIII, p. 674–675Google Scholar.
17 See International Organisation, VI, p. 144.
18 New York Times, April 21, 1953; The Times (London), 04 21, 1953Google Scholar.
19 Ibid., April 24, 1953.
20 New York Times, May 27, 1953.
21 The Times, (London), 06 30, 1953Google Scholar.
22 Ibid., April 27, 1953.
23 New York Times, May 27, 1953.
24 The Times (London), 05 13, 1953Google Scholar.
25 New York Times, May 26, 1953.
26 Ibid., May 28, 1953; The Times (London), 05 28, 1953Google Scholar.
27 The Times (London), 05 15, 1953Google Scholar.
28 Ibid., June 13, 1953.
29 New York Times, April 28, 1953.
30 Ibid., June 9, 1953; ibid.; July 1, 1953; ibid., July 3, 1953; The Times (London), 06 29, 1953Google Scholar.
31 New York Times, April 9, 1953.
32 The Times (London), 05 28, 1953Google Scholar.
34 The Times (London), 04 12, 1953Google Scholar.
35 New York Times, May 21, 1953.
36 Ibid., May 29, 1953.
37 Ibid., May 11, 1953.