Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1941-03-13


was not clarified
by the snaillike debates in Congress.
The various restricting amendments
accepted by the administration were
based on the ideal of hard headed
Mesa reflection of the cash on
the barrel" psychology on the recent
neutrality law. On the other hand,
the entire motive behind the bill
was that Of partnership. The sup
porterS of the lease-lend plan argued
that there was an identity of in
terest between ourselves and the
British. that both countries faced a
crisis in which the risks were I'M
limited and that we must pool our
resources up to the limits of ma
/ tional safety in order to preserve our
lives as well as our property, our
| freedom as well as our institutions.
Fortunately for both countries
there is a very simple and practical
| test by which we can determine
whether the banker or the partner,
is to take control of our national
defense policy. 1t is the test OF
British peace aims.
No Concern to Bankers.
II we are simply financing the
British Empire as good investment
using unconventional but realistic
measures of value, interest rates
and security, British peace aims are
no concern of ours. The individual
who borrows money from a banker
r. tiJn nUar a Jay,,Aef9o nrie{e dnaa
not expect the banker to lay down
the laws for the borrowers SUISSE
quent behavior, providing the secur-
| ity is adequate and the interest paid.
If We are simply Britain's banker,
to tide the empire over this axis
crisis it is meddlesome, impertinent
and intolerable for us to add TO
the obligations IF the loan of gocds
our own ideas as to how the empire
shall conduct itself in the postwar
world.
IF, on the other hand. we are
actually creating an Anglo Amer
lean partnership. a personal rela-
/ tionship which is to be the con-
tinuins force in the new world
order, then 1t is our duty to work
! out common war aims and common
peace aims. For II is obvious that
one partner can commit the other
and that both should be In agree
ment as to both the changing and
the fundamental purposes of their
! common enterprise.
1t is again fortunate for both
countries that the question of peace
aims was raised by opponents of the
lease-lend law. Their insistence
that we should issue a blank check
without knowing what the money
will be spent for has made it pos
sible for their opposition to be dis
armed by rational. human, sympa-
thetic cooperation in terms of world
policy as well as in terms Of ships,
guns, tanks, planes and raw ma
terialS.
Attitude to Affect Peace.
In establishing a common war
policy and common peace program,
however, the initiative must come
from the United States. II America
proposes to return to an attitude Of
irresponsible isolation after the war,
as after 1918, then the British must
seek one sort of peace-peace based
on total victory or peace based on
abject appeasement Of the dynamic
German nation, the 100000 souls
in the Third Reich who cannot be
sterilized, exterminated or divided
among their weaker neighbors ex-
cept in policy Of abject, inhuman
and self Indicating terror. II, on the
other hand. America proposes to ac-
cept future responsibility for estab-
fishing a just peace and maintain
ing tolerable world order-with all
the drain on our wealth, our ener-
gies and our intelligence which such
a peace will require of us-then a
peace of justice and reconciliation
will be possible and Shylock need
not demand his pound of flesh from
either England or the axis.
Accordingly this column invites
suggestions from its readers as to
both the war aims of a Joint Anglo
American program and the essen
tials of a peace Of justice and recon-
Citation. To begin this discussion,
perhaps the question of whether
America should be Britain's banker
or Britain's partner Is the most
urgent issue before the American
people today.
Released By Consolidated News Features. Inc.
!