Senate Select Committee - XXX

Operation Homecoming

To date, the United States' best opportunity to learn about the fates of unaccounted-for servicemen came in February and March 1972, when 591 Americans were returned during Operation Homecoming. Of the 591 POWs returned between February 12 and April 1, 1973, 457 returned from North Vietnam, 122 from South Vietnam, nine from Laos, and, following additional diplomatic negotiations, three returned from China.

In all, 566 were servicemen -- 325 were from the Air Force, 138 belonged to the Navy, 77 were Army and 26 were Marines. The 25 civilians were members of various U.S. Government agencies.

The Vietnamese listed 55 as having died in captivity; returning POWs put the number at 111. On April 13, 1973 the Pentagon announced that there was no evidence that any more U.S. POWs were still alive in Indochina. During this same period, however, the DOD's Homecoming Center at Clark Air Force Base (the Center) reported that returning POWs had provided information indicating that 156 servicemen "may have died in captivity".

POWs' View

In captivity, American servicemen made learning the names of fellow prisoners the highest priority and pledged to each other that they would all go home together.

Admiral James Stockdale, who won a presidential citation for his service to the U.S. while the senior officer held captive, said the pledge was central to POWs' survival, because it kept them going through unspeakable torture and other adversity:

There were some exceptions, Stockdale added, and some groups were kept separate:

In addition to increasing the U.S. Government's information about life in prison, the returning prisoners brought painful news about the difficulties they faced even before they got to the prison system. As Stockdale testified:

Another witness, Donnie Collins, described the ordeals her husband, Thomas E. Collins III, suffered before getting to the prison system:

Debriefings

Phase I of Operation Homecoming was the POWs' repatriation. The exit point for all but nine returned POWs was Hanoi.

Phase II of Operation Homecoming was debriefing at Clark Air Force Base by the Joint Debriefing and Casualty Reporting Center (JDCRC), under the direction of CINCPAC. JDCRC had representatives from each military service. Civilian and foreign returnees were debriefed by the Service with which they were associated or by members of the U.S. Embassy, Manila. Each Service handled its own debriefings, differing in approach, but following common debriefing instructions. The Army and Marine Corps used professional intelligence debriefers whose sole job was debriefing. The Navy and Air Force used a combination of escort and debriefer. The Navy used only Air Intelligence Officers. Air Force escort/debriefers were not chosen from specific specialties.

The Committee attempted to examine the process of debriefing returning POWs at Clark Air Force Base in the Philippines, and again when they returned to the U.S. to determine:

DIA made no final report aggregating the results of the individual debriefings after Operation Homecoming. While DoD has provided a substantial amount of material to the Committee, the collection suffered with the passage of time. Without a final report, and without complete files and access to information, it is difficult to fully assess the adequacy of Operation Homecoming debriefings nearly 20 years after the fact.

The returnees were processed in five cycles. Each group consisted of 20-150 returnees, arriving at 8-10 day intervals. The debriefs were transcribed, edited by the senior officer of each service, and transmitted. When a returnee's debriefing was completed, the intelligence packet, including the debriefing tape, transcribed debrief and/or assessment report, would be assembled and sent by the escort officer for relay to the appropriate CONUS hospital.

A summary of the debriefings included:

Returnees Debriefed:

USAF - 324

USN - 138

USA - 71

USMC - 22

US Civilians - 23

Thai Civilians - 2

German Civilians - 2

Canadian Civilians - 1

Total - 583

Returnees Not Debriefed

USAF Medical - 1

USMC Higher HQ directed - 4

USA Higher HQ directed - 6

Total - 11

The committee learned a great deal about the debriefing process from the testimony of Admiral and Mrs. Stockdale -- among them that POW wives were never debriefed by DIA, and that Admiral Stockdale's debriefing was limited to his 52-hour initial debriefing.

Phase III debriefings were conducted in the United States.

A symposium was held June 20-23, 1973 to discuss lessons learned. The panelists thought the debriefings were accomplished without major problems, although some debriefers complained that emphasis was placed on familiarization with the POWS background and insufficient stress was given to basic debriefing techniques. Rapport between the POW and his debriefer facilitated the flow of information. Each service attempted to first establish an effective working relationship. The Navy allowed the debriefer to escort the POW from Clark Air Force Base to the U.S., hoping that this would cement a working relationship. The Army and Marine Corps sought to achieve good rapport by matching the debriefer and POW by rank, background and interest. Debriefers were primary collectors of all available data.

While in captivity POWs had designated certain POWs to serve as "memory banks," this created initial pressure because many early returnees were hesitant to discuss information which they had not been directed to gather and commit to memory. This stumbling block was removed when senior POWS directed them to relate their entire experience to debriefers.

Suspicions have surrounded the debriefing of returned POWs for nearly 20 years, primarily because access has been restricted based on debriefing agreements with the returnees. Did the government leave men behind? Did key officials know it? Were the returnees told to not report certain information? Was the prison system a closed circle of knowledge; could there have been separate prison systems not known to the returning POWS? Was the American public told the truth?

SSC XXXI - Debriefing Results



SSC Menu of Testimony & Report Sections



The opinions expressed on this site are those of
Advocacy and Intelligence Index for Prisoners of War - Missing in Action.
If you have any questions or comments, please e-mail us at the above address.

Archive ©AII POW-MIA All Rights Reserved