Evening star., 1944-08-15
Red Plan Limits
10 Big A.
Diplomats Hear
Smaller Nations Held
To Consultative Role
In Political Matters
BY JOSEPH H. BAIRD.

The Soviet Russian plan for
organization of postwar world
security would place the use of
military power to stem aggres-
sion entirely in the hands of the
big Four" council, leaving to
the smaller nations of the as
Sembly only a consultative role
on political matters, it was re-
ported today in diplomatic cir
cles.
Secretary Of State Hull revealed
yesterday that he had received the
Russian plan three days ago, but
withheld information on its contents.
He refused to say whether it fitted
in with the American plan, explain
ing that he had not had time to
study it sufficiently to form definite
opinion.
Now, it is known, the three powers
which will consult during the first
phase of the conference, which will
open next Monday at Dumbarton
Oaks in Georgetown-the United
States, Great Britain and Russia
have exchanged ideas on how post
war security should be set up. The
glo-American powers will meet
with China during the second phase
OF the conference. Statements from
both the American and British sides
make it evident that their projects
are similar in principle, although
different in some details.
All Could Present Views.
Russia, 1t is understood, feels that
In the last analysis the major DOW
ers will bear the military and naval
responsibility of fighting any would
be aggressor. For that reason, Mos.
COW is reported to believe that they
alone should determine when and
where force should be used. The
Soviets, however, would not deny to
the small nations the right to full
presentation of their views before an
international assembly on all mat
ters that affect them.
The Russian attitude likely stems
In part from its experience in the
old League of Nations where Maxim
Litvinof, then Soviet foreign minis
ter and delegate to Geneva, made
long efforts to organize security by
pact among the European powers.
His slogan during this period was
Peace Is Indivisible," a phrase which
was interpreted to mean that q
threat to peace anywhere in Europe
involved all the powers and should
be met by joint action Events Of
the present war seem to have justi.
fed his point of view.
The Russians are understood to
feel that the pickering and cross
currents which developed among the
60-odd nations at Geneva were
largely responsible for thwarting de-
clslve action by Russia, Britain and
France to meet the Nazi-Fascist
menace.
Russian Article Cited.
Considerable interest has been
aroused here in excerpts from an
article appearing in a Leningrad
writer's publication, Zvezda, appear
Ing under the pen name of IN.
Malinin,' but likely the product Of
some Russian official. In view Of
Russian control of the press and
the timeliness of the articles ap-
pearance, it is regarded as a prob
able expression of Moscow's au.
thoritative viewpoint.
The article advances the view that
the directive organ" Of any post
war peace organization must be
composed solely of the great pow
ers. There would be an assembly
of smaller nations, which would de-
eide routine matters by majority
vote and more important questions
Of policy by two-thirds vote.
Within the framework of the gen.
eral security organization, the big
powers also would negotiate sep
arate treaties covering their re-
sponsibility for the use of force. In
other words, the small nations would
have voice in determining policy,
but decisive military action would
be taken only by the large states.
Definition Asked.
In these treaties" the article
says, there must be defined as pre-
cisely as possible the role OF each
power in extinguishing this or that
center OF aggression. This role, of
course. will not be the same for each
(See SECURITY, Page A-3)
/