Pueblo chieftain., 1922-03-19
(By Mark Sullivan)


WASHINGTON, D. C. March 1s.-
The declination of the United States.
in response to the invitation to take
part in the Genoa conference, has
been received almost universally by a
kind of comment which shows that the
true motive of our decl!nation was not
understood. 1t shows also that the fu-
ture American attitude toward Europe
is equally misunderstood. Quite gen.
orally the comment that has attended
the incident has taken for granted that
our preferring not to participate in
the Genoa conference is an act in the
direction of continued or renewed iso-
lation from European afafirs. This is
not the case. The parents of the policy
which dictated this reply to the Genea
invitation are Secretary OF State
Hughes and Secretary of Commerce
Hoover. Neither of these men is
believer in isolation on the part of
America from a proper degree OF parti-
cipation in International affairs on
the contrary both of them are so iden-
titled with public expressions of con-
viction in favor of closer information
al relations that in the minds of the
irreconcilables and other isolat!onists
their Republicanism Is regarded as
little tainted
Let US consider first motive which
has been widely ascribed to the ad-
ministration for its recent action about
Genoa, but which in fact had little
weight in 1t. 1t has been said that the
administration hesitated 10 go to
Genoa because acceptance might have
been fuel to the opponents OF the rati-
flea ation of the four-power treaty. II is
a fact that in connection with the
Washington conference. spokesman of
= 1
hrmed that the conference should be
made a completed success before other
conferences should be held. Naturally
thc Washington conference is not a
completed success until after our sem
ate has acted on its results. 1t has fire.
uuently been said on the part of the
administration. in connection with the
Washington conference. that our policy
in regard to restoring the world TO
equilibrium IL to take one definite step
at a time. and to make each step sue
cessful before the next Is taken. Am
bassador Harvey. at London. once ex
pressed It by saying that the purpose
OF the Washington administration
was not to sec whether the nations
could agree upon everything but
whether they could agree upon one
thing" In this. as In many Rcpub-
lican utterances about foreign policy.
there was the Implication OF a back
handed slap at the league OF nations.
But In Its essence this expressed the
hrm intention OF the administration TO
do one thing at time and to do IT
we'll. Such n policy on the part OF the
administration necessarily involves
the wish that the next conference
should be postponed until after the re-
suits of the present conference are
ratified by our senate. Ncver-the-l.ss
this will not weigh heavily in tho de-
ci-ion no. to 60 to Genoa 1t Is true
THAT IN frat In he tha mr. to-
OF the Genoa conference. March 10
would have come riEh in tho midst Of
tho senate debate on ratification OF the
four-powcr treaty. Many of tho ac-
tions taken BY the Genoa conference
would have been appearing In ,he
newspapers on these same days during
which the four-power treaty Is being
debated IN tho senate. Some Of these
actions would undoubtedly have been
seized upon by the opponents Of the
four-rower treaty to lncite in tho
American public suspicion asains. aii
forms and degree. OF co-operation by
tho United States in international mat
fsrs. But tho postponed date set for
tho Genos conference, namely. April 10
Will come ~ \ tirno when Presumably
the senate debate viii have been com
ri~t.d- April 10 as tho date for tho
Genoa conference would not rrnharss.
the administration tn this respect. In
~ifcntsliy ~ IL obvious that tho orig
'rsi promoters of the Genoa conference
when thev frrt launched 4, in Jaru-
AIRY. might have done better II they
had consulted America before 'hcy
mad. their decision and before they Is
sued tho Invitations n they had fol-
lowed tho precedent set hv our gov
e-umeut In calling the Washington
conference. they would hav. consulted
In advance those who were tc he In
-''-f both as respects tho date and as
respects tho subjects 20 he taken up.
II Is tho subjects 20 b taken up by
ne Genoa conference. or more nr-
rura'niY. tho subjects which the pro-
motors Of that conference failed TO put
on their aEeuda 'ha, has bad most to
fo with determining the decision ~
our government not 70 participate Tho
aSenfa OF tho Genoa conference dc
not include the subject Of German
separations. nor tho subject Of land
disarmament and &; has heen known
for months thai tho attitude ~ Amer
lea IL that there car ba TO Permanent
economic help for Europe until th~,~
two questions arc first settled and
settled riEh. Tho governments and
statesmen Of Europe have had ahuud-
an. opportunity tn learn tha. this ts
the attitude nf America Until tho
German rrparatipr- arc frei and nc-
-scse6 by everybody as a definite and
-nchs-rsahic future condition. there
car be no certainty about the future
economic relations of the nations ~
EUROPE with each other and with
America. n ruu.. be known bv everv-
Noi~ 'u.t vtat Germany mus, do In
'Ns future before business mon ~ gov
e-rr-ru,- can isv out future nlan- un.
90 Hrei conditions. That the fNunv