|
1901 2012
Prize category:
|
The Nobel Peace Prize 1953
George C. Marshall
Award Ceremony Speech
Presentation Speech by Carl Joachim Hambro*, Member of the Nobel Committee
When Cadet First Captain George Catlett
Marshall graduated from the Virginia Military Institute, the Nobel
Committee of the Norwegian Parliament was meeting to discuss
the awarding of Nobel's Peace Prize for the first time. And on
the day when Marshall, who had not yet completed his twenty-first
year, received a letter from the Adjutant General of the Army
informing him that the examining board had found him eminently
suitable for appointment to the Regular Army and that his
commission would be issued to him after his twenty-first birthday
- on that very day1 the first
Peace Prize was awarded in Oslo. It was given to Henri Dunant, who had
founded the Red
Cross, and to Frédéric Passy,
who had organized the first French peace society and was a
pioneer in the work for international arbitration
agreements.
If anybody at that time had told Lieutenant George Marshall that
fifty years later he would not only be president of the American Red
Cross, but also that he himself would some day receive the
Peace Prize - the prediction would hardly have been believed and
still less welcomed. Young George Marshall may have seen himself
as a future general; but he had a long way to travel before he
arrived at the clear and passionate understanding that the final
object to be obtained by war, the only justifiable goal, is to
make another war impossible. It was a way that would take him
over larger areas of the earth and the oceans and under the skies
than any commander has traveled before him, and let him see more
battlefields and a greater devastation than any general has seen
before him, and let him plan and direct larger armies and fleets
and air forces than history has ever known.
Two things stand out for those trying to follow Marshall's
development. On the one hand the insatiable desire to learn, to
know, to understand, and on the other hand his keen and
wide-awake interest in the individual soldier, his indefatigable
work for the welfare of the soldier. Both things have had a
far-reaching influence on his work and on the spiritual and
social evolution of his mind.
His eagerness to find out everything about the human beings for
whom he felt responsible made him a sometimes rather terrifying
phenomenon among his contemporaries. Twenty-one years old, he was
made commanding officer of some of the small and utterly lonely
outposts in the Philippines; he studied the language and customs
and mentality of the natives; he realized that the discipline he
valued so highly depended first of all on his own self-discipline
and his capacity for keeping his men intelligently occupied, for
giving them tasks which could awaken their interest. Two words
above all others became his guide - as he underlined it years
later in an address to the graduating class at his old military
school - the words honor and self-sacrifice.
The young officer demanded much from his men, but still more from
himself. When he graduated from V.M. I. after four years, there
was not a single demerit beside his name. And so it has continued
throughout his life. His record has always been perfectly clean
and bright. He was as straight and erect morally as he was
physically. Wherever he was sent by his superiors he won the same
reputation for eminent ability. Typical of the high esteem in
which he was held is what happened in 1916 when he returned to
the States from his second long stay in the Philippines. He took
over the training program of a camp in Utah; and when the camp
closed, the commanding officer was required to make an efficiency
report on the officers under his command. One standard question
is: «Would you desire to have him under your immediate
command in peace and in war?»
The Colonel2 wrote in reply
concerning Marshall: «Yes, but I would prefer to serve
under his command... In my judgment there are not five
officers in the Army so well qualified as he to command a
division in the field.»
The Colonel then recommended that he be promoted to brigadier
general, notwithstanding regulations, and then added to
underscore his statement: «He is my junior by over 1,800
files.»
With this reputation and such military recommendations, Marshall
sailed for France in June, 1917, with the first ship in the first
convoy of American troops. The incredible want of preparedness,
the confusion, the chaos, the lack of arms and munitions which
resulted in 25,000 casualties in this first division of 27,000
were destined to be Marshall's nightmare for many years to come.
It was made his task to organize both this division and others;
he became chief of operations of the division and later the aide
to General Pershing. In the American official military
records it is stated laconically: «He was assigned to
general headquarters at Chaumont and given the task of drafting
the plans for the St. Mihiel offensive... As that battle got
under way, he was given the task of transferring some 500,000
troops and 2,700 guns to the Argonne front in preparation for
that battle.»3 He was made a
temporary major, lieutenant colonel, and colonel; he was
recommended for promotion to brigadier general by General
Pershing whose right-hand man he had become. Pershing's
recommendation, however, was not accepted by higher authority,
and after the Armistice Marshall became captain once more; for
under American law promotion in times of peace can only be given
under the strictest rules of seniority. And Marshall had to wait
for fifteen years before he was made a colonel again.
It is not hard to understand why, once made chief of staff, he
demanded that the rules of promotion be amended. The amendment
was passed in September, 1940, and before the end of the year a
certain Major Eisenhower was made colonel and then brigadier
general, jumping 366 senior colonels.
During the years between the wars, Marshall was stationed in
Tientsin for three years. And just as in the Philippines he had
become an authority on the history and ethnography of the
islands, so in Tientsin he studied Chinese civilization, history,
and language. He was the only American officer who could examine
Chinese witnesses that appeared before him without the aid of
interpreters. And his few spare hours he utilized to learn to
write Chinese.
During the years of depression when he was colonel once again,
the soldiers' pay was reduced to such an extent that the married
men suffered real hardship, and their regimental commander
started his first Marshall aid. He taught his troops to raise
chickens and hogs; he showed them how to start vegetable gardens.
He instituted a lunch-pail system by which, on the payment of
fifteen cents, each member of the family was fed; the price was
the same, however many members there were in the family. He and
Mrs. Marshall ate the same dinner so that it should not smack of
condescending charity. Marshall had under his command an ever
increasing number of C.C.C. camps4, that curious attempt to combine some
kind of military training with the effort to fight unemployment.
For the undernourished, anemic, helpless young men of these camps
he had an absorbing interest. He organized schools for them, had
them start news-sheets, amateur theatricals; he had their teeth
taken care of; he stopped all drunkenness among them. And when
Marshall in 1938 became assistant chief of staff and then deputy
chief and in 1939 was appointed chief of staff, he took with him
to Washington this active sympathy for the private soldier, this
strong feeling that the soldier has needs other than the merely
physical. The United States at that time had an active army of
approximately 174,000 enlisted men scattered over 130 posts,
camps, and stations. In Marshall's first biennial report5 on the state of the armed forces he
remarks:
«As an army we were ineffective. Our equipment, modern at
the conclusion of the World War, was now, in a large measure,
obsolescent. In fact, during the postwar period, continuous
paring of appropriations had reduced the Army virtually to the
status of that of a third-rate power.»
The United States had no military strength that could prevent war
or even an attack on America. And Marshall, who saw the total war
approaching and his own country powerless, clearly realized the
truth of Alfred Nobel's words: «Good intentions alone can
never secure peace.»
It was during these years before America was attacked that the
ground had to be laid for the later overwhelming war effort. It
was during these years that Mrs. Marshall, who was closest to
him, prayed every night: «O, Lord, grant him
time.»
The task before Marshall, the burdens he had to shoulder during
these years of war, seemed beyond the power of man to bear. That
he did not break down was probably due to what Senator
Russell6 expressed in the words:
«Most men are slaves of their ambition. General Marshall is
the slave of his duties.»
This deep-rooted, one might say fanatic, sense of duty imposed
upon him an iron self-discipline which came close to having the
character of a mystic faith. He made it articulate in the most
spontaneous and open speech he had ever made. In June, 1941, he
gave an address at Trinity College, an Episcopalian institution in
Hartford, Connecticut. He himself belongs to the Episcopalian
faith and is an active churchgoer. He said in his opening
remarks: «I know that being with you here today is good for
my soul.» Then he added: «If I were back in my office,
I would not be using the word soul.» He goes on to
define what he means by discipline; his doing so makes this
address important for the understanding of the man and his
work.
«We are replacing force of habit of body with force of habit
of mind. We are basing the discipline of the individual on
respect rather than on fear... It is morale that wins the
victory. It is not enough to fight. It is the spirit which we
bring to the fight that decides the issue.
The soldier's heart, the soldier's spirit, the soldier's soul,
are everything. Unless the soldier's soul sustains him he cannot
be relied on and will fail himself and his commander and his
country in the end... It is morale that wins the victory... The
French never found an adequate "dictionary" definition for the
word...
It is more than a word - more than any one word, or several
words, can measure.
Morale is a state of mind. It is steadfastness and courage and
hope. It is confidence and zeal and loyalty. It is
élan, esprit de corps and determination.
It is staying power, the spirit which endures to the end - the
will to win.
With it all things are possible, without it everything else,
planning, preparation, production, count for naught.
I have just said it is the spirit which endures to the end. And
so it is.»7
This remarkable address is at the same time a creed and a
program. It is the only speech in which Marshall directly and
openly expressed the ideas which occupied him most - outside his
daily work.
«We are building that morale - not on supreme confidence in
our ability to conquer and subdue other peoples; not in reliance
on things of steel and the super-excellence of guns and planes
and bombsights.
We are building it on things infinitely more potent. We are
building it on belief, for it is what men believe
that makes them invincible. We have sought for something more
than enthusiasm, something finer and higher than optimism or
self-confidence, something not merely of the intellect or the
emotions but rather something in the spirit of the man, something
encompassed only by the soul.
This army of ours already possesses a morale based on what we
allude to as the noblest aspirations of mankind - on the
spiritual forces which rule the world and will continue to do
so.
Let me call it the morale of omnipotence. With your endorsement
and support this omnipotent morale will be sustained as long as
the things of the spirit are stronger than the things of
earth.»8
But after the Trinity address Marshall retired behind his
protective armor. And the passion always smoldering in his mind
was not expressed in words until 1945 when he wrote his biennial
report on the course of the war; in this his words of sympathy
for the common soldier have an almost explosive quality:
«It is impossible for the Nation to compensate for the
services of a fighting man. There is no pay scale that is high
enough to buy the services of a single soldier during even a few
minutes of the agony of combat, the physical miseries of the
campaign, or of the extreme personal inconvenience of leaving his
home to go out to the most unpleasant and dangerous spots on
earth to serve his Nation.»9
Nobel's Peace Prize is not given to Marshall for what he
accomplished during the war. Nevertheless, what he has done,
after the war, for peace is a corollary to this achievement, and
it is this great work for the establishment of peace which the
Nobel Committee has wanted to honor.
But two documents give some idea of General Marshall's importance
to the democratic world during the years of war.
When the victory was won on May 8, 1945, Marshall was summoned to
the office of the secretary of war, the venerable Republican
Henry Stimson, one time law partner of Elihu Root, who was awarded the Nobel
Peace Prize for 191210. Mr.
Stimson had invited fourteen generals and high officials to be
present. The seventy-eight-year-old statesman then turned to
Marshall and said:
«I want to acknowledge my great personal debt to you, Sir,
in common with the whole country. No one who is thinking of
himself can rise to true heights. You have never thought of
yourself... I have never seen a task of such magnitude performed
by man.
It is rare in late life to make new friends; at my age it is a
slow process, but there is no one for whom I have such deep
respect and, I think, greater affection.
I have seen a great many soldiers in my lifetime and you, Sir,
are the finest soldier I have ever known.
It is fortunate for this country that we have you in this
position!»11
And when Marshall at his own request resigned as chief of staff
in November, 1945, he received from his British colleagues in the
combined chiefs of staff a message which is surely without
parallel. It was signed by Chief of the Imperial General Staff
Sir Alan Brooke (now Lord Alanbrooke), by Admiral of the Fleet
Lord Cunningham of Hyndhope, and by Marshal of the Royal Air
Force Lord Portal of Hungerford12. It reads: « On your retirement
after six years as Chief of Staff of the United States Army, we,
your British colleagues in the Combined Chiefs of Staff, send you
this message of farewell.
We regret that Field Marshal Sir John Dill and Admiral of the
Fleet Sir Dudley Pound, two of your greatest friends and
admirers, are not alive today to add their names to ours. As
architect and builder of the finest and most powerful Army in
American History, your name will be honoured among those of the
greatest soldiers of your own or any other country.
Throughout your association with us in the higher direction of
the armed forces of America and Britain, your unfailing wisdom,
high principles, and breadth of view have commanded the deep
respect and admiration of us all. Always you have honoured us by
your frankness, charmed us by your courtesy, and inspired us by
your singleness of purpose and your selfless devotion to our
common cause.
Above all would we record our thankfulness to you for the leading
part which you have always taken in forging and strengthening the
bond of mutual trust and cooperation between the armed forces of
our two countries which has contributed so much to final victory
and will, we believe, endure to the benefit of civilization in
the years to come.
In bidding farewell to you who have earned our personal affection
no less than our professional respect, we would address to you a
tribute written more than 200 years ago.
...Friend to truth! Of soul sincere,
In action raithful, and in honour clear;
Who broke no promise, served no private end,
Who gained no title, and who lost no friend.»13
Between Mr. Stimson's words of national
gratitude and the message from the British chiefs of staff, we
have General Marshall's third biennial report which contains both
his military testament and an introduction to what later came to
be called the Marshall Aid.
It is particularly the last section of the report which is of
importance here. Marshall called it «For the Common
Defense». He opened with the statement that to fulfill its
responsibility for protection of the nation against foreign
enemies, the army must project its planning beyond the immediate
future. «For years men have been concerned with individual
security... But effective insurance against the disasters which
have slaughtered millions of people and levelled their homes is
long overdue.»14 He then
points to Washington's plans for a national military policy and
goes on:
«We must start, I think, with a correction of the tragic
misunderstanding that a security policy is a war policy. War has
been defined by a people who have thought a lot about it - the
Germans. They have started most of the recent ones. The German
soldier-philosopher Clausewitz described war as a special violent
form of political action. Frederick of Prussia, who left Germany
the belligerent legacy which has now destroyed her, viewed war as
a device to enforce his will whether he was right or wrong. He
held that with an invincible offensive military force he could
win any political argument. It is the doctrine Hitler carried to
the verge of complete success. This is the doctrine of Japan. It
is a criminal doctrine, and like other forms of crime, it has
cropped up again and again since man began to live with his
neighbors in communities and nations. There has long been an
effort to outlaw war for exactly the same reason that man has
outlawed murder. But the law prohibiting murder does not of
itself prevent murder. It must be enforced. The enforcing power,
however, must be maintained on a strictly democratic basis. There
must not be a large standing army subject to the behest of a
group of schemers. The citizen-soldier is the guarantee against
such a misuse of power.»15
He concludes by emphasizing:
«If this Nation is to remain great, it must bear in mind now
and in the future that war is not the choice of those who wish
passionately for peace. It is the choice of those who are willing
to resort to violence for political advantage.»16
Marshall had hardly had a week's rest after his resignation as
chief of staff when President Truman sent him to China as a special
ambassador to try to stop the pending civil war between the
Communists and the Kuomintang, i.e. Chiang Kai-shek. He
did not succeed; for when Marshall was gone, neither of the two
parties honored the agreements they had undertaken. But what
Marshall had seen and experienced in China strengthened the
conviction which the devastations of the war had planted in his
mind and which now received initial amplification in his report
from China to President Truman:
«It was his [Marshall's] opinion that steps had to be taken
to assist China and its people in the increasingly serious
economic situation and to facilitate the efforts being made
toward peace and unity in China... General Marshall felt that
Chinese political and military unity could only be consolidated
and made lasting through the rehabilitation of the country and
the permanent general improvement of economic
conditions.»17
It is an opinion which Marshall in another connection has
formulated more generally in these words: «The historians
have failed in their task; they should have been able to discover
and reveal the causes of war and make war impossible.»
And when in 1947 Marshall at the insistent request of President
Truman accepted an appointment as secretary of state, it was
because he believed that he saw the causes of war and chaos and
because he intended to remove those causes insofar as humanly
possible, and in this way make war impossible.
His apprehension, his fear of war, his feeling that another war
would mean the complete collapse of human civilization is closely
akin to the apprehension in Nobel's mind when he was drafting his
will. In 1893 he wrote in a letter18:
«I should like to dispose of a part of my fortune by
founding a prize to be given every five years (say six times; for
if we have not succeeded in reforming our present system within
thirty years we shall inevitably revert to barbarism).
This prize would be awarded to the man or woman who had achieved
most in furthering the idea of a general peace in
Europe.»
And he also wrote:
«Une nouvelle tyrannie-celle des bas fonds-s'agite dans les
ténèbres, et on croit entendre son grondement
lointain.»19
Marshall wanted to prevent what Nobel feared. Less than four
months after entering the State Department, he presented his plan
for that tremendous aid to Europe which has become inseparably
connected with his name. He stated in his famous speech at
Harvard
University:
«Our policy is directed not against any country or doctrine
but against hunger, poverty, desperation, and chaos. Its purpose
should be the revival of a working economy in the world so as to
permit the emergence of political and social conditions in which
free institutions can exist. Such assistance, I am convinced,
must not be on a piecemeal basis as various crises develop. Any
assistance that this government may render in the future should
provide a cure rather than a mere palliative.»20
Marshall carried out his plan, fighting for it for two years in
public and in Congress. And when the Marshall Plan had become a
living reality, with the agencies for its operation established,
Marshall stepped back.
But again he was called to service, being made secretary of
defense in September, 1950. When he assumed this responsibility,
it was only to be in a position to put into effect his idea of
building the future defense of the United States on a democratic
conscription and not on a standing army. When this had been
accomplished, he retired once more, this time to realize at last
the dream of his life - to grow a vegetable garden on his small
estate in Virginia.
The years that have gone by since he submitted his program have
demonstrated its constructive character. And the organs which
have grown from the Marshall Aid have, more than anything else in
these difficult years, contributed to what Nobel termed «the
idea of a general peace in Europe» and to a realistic
materialization of the idea Nobel in his testament called
brotherhood among nations, although within a more narrow
framework than Marshall had desired.
The Nobel Peace Prize, therefore, is awarded to George Catlett
Marshall.
* Mr. Hambro, also at
this time president of the (Odelsting) a section of the Norwegian
Parliament, delivered this speech on December 10, 1953, in the
Auditorium of the University of Oslo, following Mr. Jahn's speech in
honor of Albert Schweitzer. The
translation is based upon the Norwegian text published in Les
Prix Nobel en 1953. General Marshall was present at the
ceremony and, at the conclusion of Mr. Hambro's speech, received
his award from Mr. Jahn, chairman of the Nobel Committee. General
Marshall gave an impromptu response to the presentation.
1. December 10, 1901.
2. Lt. Colonel Johnson Hagood,
commanding officer at Fort Douglas, Utah, 1916. The quotation is
from Marshall's Efficiency Report, December 31, 1916. see Forrest
C. Pogue, George C. Marshall: Education of a General, p.
138 and ch. 8, fn. 22.
3 Marshall's handling of the staff
work for the St. Mihiel offensive is summarized by Robert Payne
in The Marshall Story, pp.75-79; by William Frye in
Marshall: Citizen Soldier, pp. 154-158; by Pogue, op.
cit., ch. 11.
4. The Civilian Conservation
Corps, created in 1937, grew out of the Emergency Conservation
work established in 1933; reorganized in 1939 and disbanded in
1942, it was intended to provide work and training for unemployed
young men and to carry on a program of conservation of natural
resources.
5 Report on the Army, July 1,
1939, to June 30, 1941: Biennial Report of General George C.
Marshall, p. 12.
6. Richard B. Russell (1897-1971),
U.S. Senator from Georgia, chairman of the Armed Services
Committee.
7. See H.A. de Weerd, Selected
Speeches and Statements of General of the Army George C.
Marshall, pp. 121-125. The order in which these sentences occur
in the original text is as follows:
«The soldier's heart, the soldier's
spirit, the soldier's soul, are everything. Unless the soldier's
soul sustains him he cannot be relied on and will fail himself
and his comrnander and his country in the end.»
(p.122).
«It is not enough to fight. It is the
spirit which we bring to the fight that decides the issue. It is
morale that wins the victory.
The French never found an adequate dictionary
definition for the word...» (p. 122).
«It is more than a word... And so it
is» (p. 123). [Same in both texts.]
«We are replacing force of habit of body
with force of habit of mind. We are basing the discipline of the
individual on respect rather than on fear...» (p.
124).
8. Ibid., pp.
124-125.
9. The Winning of the War in
Europe and the Pacific: Biennial Report of the Chief of Staff of
the United States Army, July 1, 1943, to June 30, 1945, to the
Secretary of War, p. 110.
10. Henry L. Stimson
(1867-1950), American statesman; secretary of war (1911-1913;
1940-1945) and secretary of state (1929-1933). Elihu Root
(1845-1937), Nobel Peace Prize laureate for 1912.
11. See Henry L. Stimson and
McGeorge Bundy, On Active Service in Peace and War (New
York: Harper, 1948), p. 664. First part of quotation is in the
Stimson and Bundy book; second part is in a document in the files
of the George C. Marshall Research Library; complete text in
memorandum by Aide to Secretary of War Kyle to Col. Frank
McCarthy, Secretary, General Staff, May 11, 1945.
12. Alan Francis Brooke,
Viscount Alanbrooke (1833-1963), British field marshal, chief of
the imperial general staff (1941-1946). Andrew Browne Cunningham,
Viscount Cunningham of Hyndhope (1833-1963), British first sea
lord and chief of naval staff (1943-1946). Charles F. A. Portal,
Viscount Portal of Hungerford (1893- ), British air chief marshal
and chief of air staff (1940-1945).
13. See Katherine Marshall,
Together: Annals of an Army Wife. The text of the message
is found only in the second edition and is the plate in the front
of the book; the original document is on display in the George C.
Marshall Library Museum in Lexington, Va.
14. The Winning of the War
in Europe and the Pacific, p. 117.
15. Ibid.
16. Ibid., p. 123.
17. United States Relations
with China, Department of State (Washington, D.C., Office of
Public Affairs, 1949), p. 145.
18. Letter to Baroness Bertha von Suttner (recipient
of the Nobel Peace Prize for 1905) dated Paris, January 7,
1893.
19. «A new tyranny, that of
the dregs of the population, is lurking in the shadows and one
can almost hear its distant rumble.» Translation taken from
«The Peace Prize» by August Schou, in Nobel: The Man
and His Prizes (Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1962), p. 528.
20. «European Initiative
Essential to Economic Recovery.» Remarks made by the
Secretary of State on the occasion of the commencement exercises
at Harvard University, June 5, 1947. Department of State,
Publication 2882, European Series, 25, p. 4.
From Nobel Lectures, Peace 1951-1970, Editor Frederick W. Haberman, Elsevier Publishing Company, Amsterdam, 1972
Copyright © The Nobel Foundation 1953
MLA style: "The Nobel Peace Prize 1953 - Presentation Speech". Nobelprize.org. 21 May 2013 http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1953/press.html
