Evening star., 1934-01-14
NON.INTERVENTION PLEDGE!
OFROOSEVELTNO SURPRISE
Promise Is Only Expression of U. s. For
eign Policy Development Begun Un-
der Administration of Hoover.

Then came the Cuban crisis, and
with 1t the first test for the New
Deal" in inter-American relations. Al
though the United States had an op-
| ton to intervene. under legal right
which 1t has in no other Latin Ameri-
can republic excepting Panama, the
Roosevelt Hull administration refused
persistently to land armed forces In
the island. OF course. even the in
direct, diplomatic pressure which WASH
ington exercised in the emergency may
be subject to criticism, but it is use
less . to deny that it showed a tre-
mendouS improvement over the typical
procedure of earlier administrations.
For much less than what happened
in Cuba last August, and with far
less justification, some OF President
Roosevelt's predecessors landed Marines
in various Southern countries. Com
paratively speaking. then, and conSid-
ering the treaty rights of the United
States, the reluctance of Washington
to intervene militarily in Cuba during
the past few months, has borne out the
"good-neighbor" policy and has left no
doubt as to the sincerity Of President
Roosevelt's intentions.
First n-Intervention Pledge.
Only last month. these good inten-
tions of the Chief Executive of the
United States and of his Secretary of
State were laid down in unmistakable
terms before the delegates of l9 Ameri-
can republics gathered at Montevideo.
Secretary Hull's able and frank declara-
ton of policies at the Uruguayan capi-
tai amounted to final remuneration OF
all claims for Intervention on the part
of the United States.
nf
that President Roosevelt set forth the
other day his pledge of non-interven-
tion. But the fact that it was not
unexpected, but rather the conflrma-
ton of an attitude already apparent.
does not minimize its Importance. This
is. after ALL the first time that nom
intervention has been formally promised
by the Chief Executive of the United
States.
The previous moves in the develop
ment of this new Latin American
policy" of the State Department and
the previous assurances of other Ameri-
can statesmen may have given close
observers sufficient indication of the
change of policies. But this is the
first time that such change has
been confirmed by the highest spokes-
man for the Government of the United
States. And it is only now that public
opinion has really been made &C
quainted with it. When the Chief
Executive of the United States official
ly announces that "the definite policy
of the United States from now on is
one opposed to armed intervention"
not even the man in the street no mat
ter how little he knows about the pre-
vious steps taken in this direction, can
| fail to take notice.
This IS the main significance of the
Woodrow Wilson dinner speech. The
President has formally committed this
country to policy Of intervention
If in the future the Washington Gov
ernment deviates from that course the
inconsistency will show itself only too
clearly. At other times in the past
high officials and leaders in the United
States have made similar promises, only
to be ignored later on by the actions
Of the State and Navy Departments
But when the President himself
pledges his administration to a policy
of n-intervention, the possibilities of
any new offense in the future are con-
| would be too obvious and at the ex-
pense of the prestige of the admin
istration.
Joint Action" Useless.
On the other hand. although 1t per-
fected the new attitude, the Presidents
pronouncement did not complete it.
Several Of the products Of the inter-
| vention mania just discontinued are
still in existence. Not until the last
of them has been removed will the
ne wdeal for Latin America be a COM
plete reality.
And even then something more def
mite than the rather vague assurances
! of "joint action" to prevent the con-
hicts of the future will be required be-
fore Pan-American harmony is estab-
lished with any degree Of permanency.
Under the present circumstances. in
the absence of any organized machin-
cry for the exercise of it, promises Of
"joint action" are little more than fiat
tering diplomatic gestures. And yet,
we must admit it, they are quite an
improvement over the state of affairs
prevailing for the past few decades.
TCopyrieht 1934.)