Evening star., 1944-03-30

teranceS an d Samuel Grafton.
plous wishes is then struck lightly
with paperweight and dubbed a
foreign policy.
The intellectual vigor of most
} American critics of foreign policy
being approximately equal to the in
tellectual vigor of those officials who
hailed and cheered the discovery of
Glraud in North Africa, this proc
ess usually silences the major critics.
sometimes it even brings down a
fieck or two of abuse on the heads
OF those who, like your subscriber,
may have helped to raise the issue
in the first place.
And SO, about twice a year, a
ripple Of doubt stirs the pundits. A
press conference at the State De-
partment results. The pundits re-
lax, with the air of men ashamed
to have been caught prying.
Mr.. Hull can always prove that
on such-and-such a date he said
so-and-so; and that he said it with
all the force at his command. 1t is
quite true. On the level of belief, we
have a foreign minister to be proud
OF. I doubt if there is another in
the world SO deeply, so personally
committed to so many splendid alb
stractions and impressive ideals.
Mr.. Hull's 17-point enunciation of
a foreign policy" is actually a kind
of credo. 1t tells us what the man
who wrote it thinks, and his
thoughts are fine thoughts. He is
for peace, he is for international CO.
operation; he is for an accord among
the four great powers; he is for ad-
Judication of international disputes;
he is for world in which there will
be more trade and fewer weapons.
If there Is anything good possible,
Mr., Hull is willing for it to happen.
And he really is.
Not a Wish, But Sword.
But a foreign policy is not a
credo. 1t is not a scrapbook, not
an intellectual diary, not a cata-
logue of wisdom and wishes. 1t is
either sword or it is nothing.
CMr. Walter Lippmann calls it a
shield" but I prefer sword"
sword being a better shield than
a shield isl A foreign policy is
that which makes the things a
nation wants to happen, happen.
1t has a functional meaning, or
1t has no meaning.
A foreign policy is not a set
of hopes; it is an instrument for
fulfilling hopes. 1t is a mobilization
of all of a nations resources in
a system of threats and promises,
for bringing about desired political
ends. 1t is combination of politi-
cal gardening and dry war.
But Mr.. Hull's patch of paper has
very little functional meaning,
either as sword or shield. 1t is not
foreign policy. 1t is, largely, a
statement of Mr.. Hull's hopes for
the future. These actually require
foreign policy to bring them
about.
Hope With Shoes on Its Feet.
Let me clarity the point with
Just one illustration out of a pos
sible many: Both we and Russia
want Europe free of Hitler. If
you will look toward the east in
Europe, you will see guerrilla ac-
tivity almost everywhere, popular
movements. in Yugoslavia, in
Poland, in the Baltic states, even in
Hungary and Rumania, movements
energized by Russia, sometimes
mobilized by Russia, recognized by
Russia. That is policy; not merely
a wish, but an instrument; hope
with shoes on It's feet and a gun
on its shoulder.
Now, If you look to the west, in
Europe, you see almost none of
this activity. Guerrilla warfare
fades out as you come toward "our"
territory, and is replaced by indivi-
dual sabotage. Where a flare of
guerrilla action occurs, as in
France. we have no organizational
contact with it, and are, often
enough, on bad terms with its lead
ers. We and Russia may have
similar hopes for Europe, but on
one side these hopes are imple-
mented by a policy; on the other
side there is tentativeness, timidity,
delay, no policy.
IT is not what VOL bor,o for a