NOMINATION REFERENCE AS IN EXECUTIVE SESSION, Ordered, That the following nomination be referred to the Committee on Armed Services: The following-named officer under the provisions of Title 10, United States Code, Section 601, to be assigned to a position of importance and responsibility designated by the President under Title 10, United States Code, Section 601: To be Supreme Allied Commander Europe, and Commander in Chief, United States European Command Gen. John R. Galvin, United States Army. [The résumé of service career of Gen. John R. Galvin, which was transmitted to the committee at the time the nomination was referred follows:] RÉSUMÉ OF SERVICE CAREER OF JOHN ROGERS GALVIN, GENERAL Date and place of birth: 13 May 1929, Melrose, Massachusetts. Years of active commissioned service: Over 32. Present assignment: Commander in Chief, United States Southern Command, Quarry Heights, Panama, APO Miami 34003, since March 1985. Military schools attended: The Infantry School, Basic Course. The Armor School, Advanced Course. United States Army Command and General Staff College. United States Army War College. Educational degrees: United States Military Academy-BS Degree-Military Science; Columbia University-MA Degree-English. Major duty assignments: Student, Infantry Officer Basic Course, United States Army Infantry School, Fort Benning, Georgia, August 1954 to December 1954. Platoon Leader and later Executive Officer, Company I, 65th Infantry, Camp Losey, Puerto Rico, February 1955 to December 1955. Assistant Post S-2 (Intelligence) and S-3 (Operations), and later Post S-2 (Intelligence) and S-3 (Operations), Fort Brooke, Puerto Rico, January 1956 to October 1956. Advisor to the Colombian Army Ranger School, United States Army Mission to Colombia, Bogota, Colombia, October 1956 to March 1958. Platoon Leader, Company A, 1st Airborne Battle Group, 501st Infantry, 101st Airborne Division, Fort Campbell, Kentucky, March 1958 to July 1958. Commander, Company A, 1st Airborne Battle Group, 501st Infantry, 101st Airborne Division, Fort Campbell, Kentucky, July 1958 to September 1958. Executive Officer, Company A, 1st Airborne Battle Group, 501st Infantry, 101st Airborne Division, Fort Campbell, Kentucky, September 1958 to June 1959. Assistant S-1 (Personnel), 1st Airborne Battle Group, 501st Infantry, 101st Airborne Division, Fort Campbell, Kentucky, June 1959 to October 1959. Commander, Company B, 1st Airborne Battle Group, 501st Infantry, 101st Airborne Division, Fort Campbell, Kentucky, October 1959 to August 1960. Student, Armor Officer Advanced Course, United States Army Armor School, Fort Knox, Kentucky, September 1960 to June 1961. Student, Columbia University, New York, New York, July 1961 to August 1962. Instructor, First and Third Class English and later Associate Professor, Department of English, United States Military Academy, West Point, New York, July 1962 to July 1965. Student, United States Army Command and General Staff College, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, July 1965 to June 1966. Operations Officer, S-3 (Operations), 1st Brigade, 1st Infantry Division and later Logistics Plans Officer, Plans Branch, Plans and Operations Division, Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff, G-4 (Logistics), Headquarters, United States Army, Phuoc Vinh, Vietnam, June 1966 to December 1966. Assistant G-3 (Plans), Office of the Assistant Chief of Staff, G-3 (Operations), 1st Cavalry Division (Airmobile), United States Army, Phuoc Vinh, Vietnam, December 1966 to May 1967. Researcher and Writer, Office of the Secretary of Defense Task Force for National Security Policy, Washington, DC, July 1967 to November 1967. Staff Officer, Special Projects Branch, Public Information Division, Office of the Chief of Information, United States Army, Washington, DC, December 1967 to February 1968. Military Assistant and Aide to the Secretary of the Army, Office of the Secretary of the Army, Washington, DC, February 1968 to August 1969. Assistant Chief of Staff, G-2 (Intelligence), 1st Cavalry Division (Airmobile), United States Army, Phuoc Vinh, Vietnam, September 1969 to April 1970. Commander, 1st Battalion, 8th Cavalry, 1st Cavalry Division (Airmobile), United States Army, Phuoc Vinh, Vietnam, April 1970 to November 1970. Combat Developments Staff Officer, Force Development Division, Doctrine Directorate and later Chief, Special_Presentations Branch, United States Army Combat Developments Command, Fort Belvoir, Virginia, December 1970 to June 1972. Student, United States Army War College, Carlisle Barracks, Pennsylvania, June 1972 to June 1973. Deputy Secretary of the Joint Staff, United States European Command, June 1973 to May 1974. Military Assistant to the Supreme Allied Commander Europe, Wuerzburg, May 1974 to May 1975. Commander, Division Support Command, 3d Infantry Division (Mechanized), United States Army Europe, Wuerzburg, May 1975 to January 1977. Chief of Staff, 3d Infantry Division (Mechanized), United States Army Europe, January 1977 to June 1978. Assistant Division Commander, 8th Infantry Division (Mechanized), United States Army Europe, June 1978 to August 1980, Mainz. Assistant Deputy Chief of Staff for Training, United States Army Training and Doctrine Command, Fort Monroe, Virginia, August 1980 to May 1981. Commanding General, 24th Infantry Division (Mechanized) and Fort Stewart, Georgia, June 1981 to June 1983. Commanding General, VII Corps, United States Army Europe, Stuttgart, July 1983 to February 1985. Summary of Joint Experience: Advisor, Colombian Army Ranger School, United States Mission to Colombia, Bogata, Colombia, October 1956 to March 1958, First Lieutenant. Researcher and Writer, Office of the Secretary of Defense Task Force for National Security Policy, Washington, DC, July 1967 to November 1967, Major. Deputy Secretary of the Joint Staff, United States European Command, June 1973 to May 1974, Lieutenant Colonel. Military Assistant to the Supreme Allied Commander, Europe, May 1974 to May 1975, Colonel. Commander in Chief, United States Southern Command, Panama, March 1985 to Present, General. STATEMENT OF GEN. JOHN R. GALVIN General GALVIN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to just say a word. I believe that my replacement, Gen. Fred Woerner, who will be coming in to Panama, is the man that we within the services have trained better than at any other time in the past to take over in Latin America today. He served 3 years in Guatemala at the time that the Ambassador there was assassinated. And, indeed, General Woerner's car was also fired on there. And he luckily was unhurt. He has served 4 years in Panama and 2 years in Colombia where he was working in foreign area officer training. He is married to a girl from Bolivia. He did his advance military training at the staff college in Montevideo, Uruguay. He has done his university work here in the United States in Latin American affairs. He speaks fluent Spanish. Fred Woerner is a man that I am very content to have as the man who will be carrying on for us, for the United States in Latin America. I would also like to say that the man who, with your confirmation, I will be replacing in Europe, Bernie Rogers, has been a man whom I have looked up to as an example throughout my career. I am very proud to think that I would be selected to serve as a replacement for him. That is really all that I had for the committee, and I thank you very much for this opportunity to speak. Senator EXON [presiding]. General, thank you very much. I want to join in welcoming you here. I see no problem whatsoever with your appointment, and therefore we will make every attempt to have this confirmation hearing as brief as possible. I think there may be several questions that we would like to submit for the record for you to answer. Also, I hope that you would agree, that at any appropriate time that this committee feels compelled to ask you to come back for help and advice and consultation, that you would agree at this time to do so and give us your frank appraisal and answers. Would you agree to that? General GALVIN. Sir, I believe it is absolutely essential to have a good communication with the Congress. And I certainly would be agreeable to come back at any time that it would be requested by this committee or by the Congress. Senator EXON. Thank you very much. General, I would just like to ask a few general questions of you, and then when Senator Warner returns he will have a few questions, possibly. And then we can wrap this up. I recognize you have not had a chance to take a close look at all of the difficult choices that you are going to have to make in your new command, and decisions that you will have to participate in. But just for the record, could you possibly sum up what you see as of now as the key strengths and weaknesses of NATO, whether military, economic, political, or strategic in nature? Have you established which challenges, as of now, you would like to tackle first in your important new assignment? General GALVIN. I think, Senator, that some of those challenges will establish themselves for me. I probably will not have to trouble myself in seeing which ones will come first. Obviously much of this will depend on how the key issue goes at the present time-and here I refer to INF and the decisions that have to be made here-and I assume it might even come before I take command on the 26th of June, as it is now scheduled. Second, implementation of whatever those decisions are will be part of my responsibilities. I think that we have in this question one in which the whole world has a hope that we will be able to reduce the threat of a nuclear conflagration. But at the same time we have the defense of Western Europe to consider. And that, of course, is what General Rogers has said, and I follow very closely his approach. That is what is being decided now, this week perhaps, in Europe with the meetings that have been ongoing. I think that also in this we will have the question of the conventional forces and how those forces can be made stronger. There are a number of different facets of that, as you know. They include, the ability to work as a coalition in all the different ways. And second, such things as rationalization, standardization and interoperability, which we have followed for years. So, first will come that question that involves the arrangements to be made with the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact on the reduction of nuclear weapons. And then second will be associated issues such as conventional weapons, conventional forces, chemical weaponry and others. After that, I see questions and issues such as Spain and the basing, relationships with France, and a number of issues of cooperation among nations within the alliance. All of these appear to me to be on the front burner-the first issues that will come up during my tenure. As you know, I have been also completely involved in what I am doing in Latin America. So therefore at this time I feel I have a lot of consultation to do with the other 15 nations' military officials and, of course, with the NATO Military Committee, before I would be able to feel fully content with how I myself would see the strategy for the next months and years. I would assume, though, that by the time that I would be scheduled to appear again before this committee under the normal circumstances, which would probably be in January, roughly 6 months from now when I am sure you will be calling again for my comments on strategy and other matters, that I would be by that time completely up to speed in my own thinking about the strategy as well as having fully coordinated with the other nations, which obviously is vitally important to us too. Senator EXON. General, thank you very much. And as you know from time to time members of this committee and other Members of the Senate come over there. All of us want to give you all the help that we can, and I think you are going to find that to be from both sides of the aisle, and regardless of whether a Senator served even on this committee or not. I would like to get your comment on what General Rogers has said on several occasions over the last few years. And that is that under a full-scale conventional attack by the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies, NATO would very likely have to resort to an early use of nuclear weapons, battlefield weapons, possibly in a matter of days and not weeks or months, due to shortages of conventional ammunition as well as troops. Do you feel that you have enough understanding of the situation there yet to agree with General Rogers on that statement? General Rogers would never have made that statement unless he was convinced that it was totally accurate. And this committee always appreciated his frankness to share his concerns which is probably another way of saying, the United States of America and all our NATO allies had better recognize and realize that this is not likely to change very much unless we begin to act. General Rogers' statement is a very clear message to us that we have not done enough, possibly as a country and we have not done enough as a member of NATO, nor has NATO as an organization done enough to prevail for a conventional attack. Do you have any views on that at this time? General GALVIN. Yes, Senator Exon, I do have views on that. I am sure that you recall that it has been only 2 years since I was commanding VII Corps in Stuttgart under General Rogers. And prior to that I was the Assistant Division Commander of the 8th Division, also under General Rogers. Prior to that I was the Chief of Staff of the 3d Infantry Division, under General Haig and then General Rogers. And throughout that period of time, I was convinced that what General Rogers was saying early on and what he is still saying today is absolutely correct. And that is that we are not in the position to defend Western Europe under full all-out attack by the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact without resorting to nuclear weapons. General Rogers is right. I believe that his views, which I have studied during my years of experience in Europe, have been correct all along. I completely support those points that you mentioned, and I think you are quite accurately expressing what General Rogers has said again and again. Senator EXON. Do you feel that during the last 2 or 3 years, since you left that command and took up your new responsibilities, with the Southern Command that overall there has been any significant change, strengthening or weakening with the NATO conventional warfare defense posture? Or do you assume it is probably about the same? General GALVIN. I assume it is probably about the same, sir. Senator EXON. We hear a great deal today about the different options. The Soviets have proposed a so-called zero option agreement that would eliminate all of the INF and short range missiles in Europe. |