Evening star., 1939-03-28
HitIer's Friends

uutSSu uUISuuOS
1t may properly be assumed that
Senator Borah, in his recent attack
on the administration foreign pol
icy, has stated the case for the isola-
tionists. In subsequent debate on
pending neutrality legislation his ar
guments will no doubt be enlarged
upon, but it is not likely there will be
any important departure by those
who think as he does from his funda-
mental thesis that America, in this
critical juncture In world affairs,
should retire behind the natural bar
riers Of the Atlantic and the Pacific
and leave the other nations to work
out the problems of the world exclu-
sive of America as best they can
alone.
Senator Borah based his argument
principally on the assumption that
the issue threatening war in Europe
is "imperialism"-a conflict Of eco
nomic ambitions-and not a por-
tentous struggle for survival between
the liberal doctrines of democracy
and the absolutism of the totalitarian
states. Ignoring the possibility that
the European democracies may until
recently honestly have believed
themselves incapable Of stopping
Hitler by force, Senator Borah
charges in effect that Britain delib-
erately and selflshly encouraged the
Fuehrer in his ruthless eastward
drive, hoping that the sacrifice Of
Austria and Czecho- -Slovakia would
satisfy the territorial appetite Of the
Nazis and leave the British Empire
safe. On the basis of that charge,
which is not supported by any evi-
dence as yet made public, he said
that Hitler has no better friend"
than England. In that connection,
it may be wondered whether it is
Senator Borah, and not England,
who unwittingly, by attacking the
British Empire and supplying surface
evidence Of divided public opinion in
this country, is giving most substan-
TALLY of aid and comfort to the Ger
man dictator.
No one would deny to Senator
Borah the right to express his honest
and considered convictions on the
vitally important question of what,
If any, role this country should play
in world affairs. But it may fairly
be asked whether, on what at best ap-
pears to be a debatable assumption
of fact, statesman whose word car
ries so much weight both at home
and abroad should, In the face of
strong evidence to the contrary, give
the impression that the President,
charged With the fundamental re-
sponsibility for conducting American
foreign affairs, is not supported by
the great majority of the American
people In his determination, by
methods stronger than words but
short of war;" to lend moral and ma
terial support to the hard-pressed
democracies of Europe as process
of enlightened and eminently proper
elf-interest on the part Of this Ma
tion-world conditions being as they
are.
The neutrality legislation which
the administration hopes to see
passed would in event of war permit
this country to sell its goods, includ-
ing munitions, to any country that
can pay cash and transport them in
it's own ships. For practical pur-
poses, that means England and
France. The isolationist group seek
to close our ports to any nation at
war-aggressor as we'll as the victim
of aggression. Should a European
war break out, they would, in effect,
have America help the dictators by
denying our resources to the democ-
racies to whom they would otherwise
be available.
The question is not whether we
should aid England and France or
remain neutral, for there can be no
neutrality in fact. II war comes
and no reasonable man can fail to
recognize that the non-isolationists
are as earnestly and probably more
practically seeking to avoid it as their
isolationist conferees-we will have
to choose one way or the other. To-