Evening star., 1943-10-30

<bOOStNCIl, Quill !$8$$8 ssS8S"
ner Welles and David Lawrence.
others on the Democratic side have
adopted the suggestion, but it is
doubtful whether it ever will be
realized for the reason that the
pressure of events will prevent such
a long delay in organizing perma-
nently the peace of the world.
The notion that the whole world
will wait several years to find out
who will or will not assume respon-
slblllty for making any Would-be
aggreSsor nations behave or for the
outlining of the social and economic
and geographical arrangements on
which Europe and the rest of the
world can base their commercial
and political relations. is one that
flies in the face Of human expert
ence.
The peoples of the world will not
sit idly by while few chosen gov
ernments decide what qualihca tions
they will require for admission to
their exclusive club or four power
alliance even though 1t be called
temporary" affair.
Example of 1919.
The pressure for peace and a per-
manent setup was so strong in 1918
and 1919 that France and Britain
and Italy were ready to side-track
President Wilson's proposal for a
League of Nations so that treaty
could be hastily patched up and
signed. Mr.. Wilson'S heroic refusal
to sign treaty that did not con-
tain worldwide organization for
the preservation of peace was the
only thing that prevented the i'm
mediate return Of the balance-of-
power system when the Armistice
was only six months old.
The desire for security either bv
alliances or by collective oreaniza-
ton cannot be deferred. Instead
OF urging that the world must wait
till long after the Armistice before
adopting a permanent peace form
ula or system, the argument is far
more persuasive to begin making the
peace organization before the Ar
mistice is signed. The United Ma
tlons can be enlarged during the
war. Provision can be made for
countries or nations and not neces-
sarlly for particular governments.
Recognition Of a government always
can be deferred until there is in
ternal stability in country. It can
be Withdrawn or extended bv other
nations depending upon whether the
conditions established by familiar
precedents in international law are
fulfilled. Whether the exiled gov
ernments will ultimately be the real
governments is secondary. The Ger
tam thing is that there will be
France and Poland and a Belgium
and Holland and a Norway and
a Sweden and a Denmark and a
CzeChoslovakia and Greece and
a Yugoslavia and a Spain and
Portugal and an Italy, as we'll as
other nations which will in due time
cast aside their yoke of tyranny and
embrace freedom.
Would Hearten Peoples.
It would hearten the peoples of
the oppressed lands to know that
provision is being made for them
now and that their future sovereignty
is not to remain in doubt for five
to seven years.
Mr.. Hoover did put down his foot
hard on the idea of military alli-
ance5 such as have been proposed
for America and Britain, and he de-
serves applause for his splendid
description of the true American
foreign policy Of the last several
decades.
I'VE are told" he says in his lat
est address. that we have had no
foreign policy. Perhaps future his
torlans, studying this last 1870 years.
will say that America had the most
powerful of foreign policies. That
is helping other nations to gain
freedom and independence and pro-
tecting those who have secured it
Those historians would point to
the war with Mexico to free Texas
and California. securing for them
government within our Union.
Again the historians would point to
the war with Spain to free Cuba
and the Philippines. They would
point to the World War to establish
the independence of nine new ma
tlons in Europe. They would point
to the present war where our men
are fighting to preserve the indie
pendence of Britain, France, Russia,
China and Is little nations.
And has not the United States
been the actuating inspiration for
freedom for all nations through all
these years? If this is not for
elen policy, it certainly is century,
long crusade. Generations of Amer
leans have died for it."
The theory that America has had
no foreign policy but that Britain
has had a foreign policy has for
years gone unrefuted. If by for
elgn policy" is meant the imperial
ism and commercialisno that bas
dominated Britain's external rela-
tlons, then it is true America has
had no such foreign policy. And,
what is more, Americans do not
want one like it either.
Reproduction Rights ReservedD