Evening star., 1938-12-20

the Panay by the
japanese created a critical incident.
Now, however, the real reason for
the selection becomes crystal clear,
and it has far more significance
than anything personal might have,
desirable as it is for political ad-
versaries to give due recognition to
each other when foreign policy
questions are at stake. The MOTIVE
behind the appointment of Mr..
Landon and the willingness Of the
Secretary of State to let Mr.. Lam
don come back for Christmas. as
planned beforehand, was the desire
to impress Latin America with one
very essential point-the unity OF
all political parties and factions in
the United States behind the Monroe
Doctrine.
The speech delivered by Mr.. Lam
don at Lima in the last "a hours is
officially termed an individual eX-
preston, as, indeed, it must be, be-
cause it dealt with the question of
united political sentiment behind
the Monroe Doctrine; but hardly
anybody in the Republican party
would for moment dissent from
the proposition that the man who
was the standard-be in 1886
speaks at least on this question for
the whole Republican party.
No Continuity of Policy.
Throughout Latin America, as
doubtless in Europe, the changing
character of the political admins
trations in Washington is often
subject of discussion, it being argued
that the United States does not
have continuity in its foreign policy.
It may well be that the Republican
gains in the congressional elections
of 1888 accentuated in the Latin
American mind the idea that what
President Roosevelt might propose
would not have the concurrence of
the Republicans, especially since in
foreign policy two-thirds vote of
the United States Senate is required
If treaty is submitted for ratifica-
ton.
Looking back over American his
tory in the last so years or more,
the Monroe Doctrine has been stead
tasty upheld by Democratic as we'll
as Republican Presidents and, if
anything, the doctrine has been
even more literally construed by Re-
publican rather than Democratic ad-
ministrations to include protection
for our national interests as against
other American states.
There have been some adverse
comments from Latin American
countries recently to the effect that
the proposed reinforcement of the
Monroe Doctrine was really cloak
for imperialistic designs on the
part of the United States, and it
may be that Republicans rule in
Washington is feared as likely to
lead to more, rather than less, inter-
Vention in the internal affairs of
the Latin American republics.
Sentiment of People.
But the important point is not
what the Republican party or the
Democratic party as such may pro-
claim, but what the sentiment of
the American people happens to be.
That sentiment gradually has been
growing unanimous on the point
that physical intervention in the
affairs of Latin American states is
not only undesirable as a national
policy, but fraught with more harm
than good to the United States
itself.
If, on the other hand, national
policies in Latin American countries
90 to the point of conflscation of
property without due process of law,
as for instance nowadays in Mexico,
the damage done to future invest
ments in those countries will be far
greater than will result from the
energetic protests of the American
Government.
To say that irresponsible govern
ments which flout their word and
the established rules of interna-
tional law must fear the application
Of the Monroe Doctrine is to impute
to the doctrine an unnecessary
meaning. Rather can it be said
that when American states below
the Rio Grande disregard the ten
cts Of international law with re-
spect to the rights of legitimate
property owners, they create con-
troversies with property owners
from European as well as American
countries, and the basis for appre-
hension concerning outside action is
thereupon laid
Policies of Neighborliness.
But while Pan-American affairs
have reached a stage in the evolu-