Detroit evening times. (Detroit, Mich) 1921-1958, 1945-01-01

"A November the New York Times-which had
opposed THIRD TERN for Mr.. Roosevelt
came out in support of his FOURTH-TERM
candidacy.
In a caustc editorial review of the New Deals
record in DOMESTIC affairs, the Times amply
justified its adverse position in 1910.
1t made no pretense that the New Deal had
governed the nation any better AFTER 1910.
In espousing the feurth-tern adventure, it
based its action solely upon the assertion that
America, desperately at war, could not dispense
with Mr.. Roosevet's FOREIGN POLICY and
must therefore keep Mr.. Roosevelt in the White
House
At that time the country had no very coherent
idea as to what the administrations "FORElGN
POLICY" was and the Times gave no clear eX-
PLANTATION of WHAT 1T WAS ENDORSING.
Now it is evident that the Times did not know
the facts by which it was assumed to be guided
and that, indeed, the Roosevelt foreign policy"
was very different from what the Times believed
it to be.
This is proved by recent dispatches to the
Times from its experienced correspondents in
Europe regarding the difficult and dangerous
political and military situations in Greece, in
Yugoslavia and in Poland.
ON SUNDAY, Dec II, the Times published
~ front-page dispatch from Rome, written by c.
L. Sulzberger, who was recently appointed chief
of the Times foreign bureau.
This dispatch had to do with power politics"
in the Mediterranean area.
The headline under which it was presented
read
Britain Enjoys Major Role in Balkans by
L. S. Consent"
According to Mr. Sulzberger, A DEAL" to
this effect was made SECRETLY by President
Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill CAT THE
CASABLANCA- CONFERENCE IN EARLY
1913"
Nothing whatever was said about the under
cover arrangement in our presidential campaign
MORE THAN A YEAR LATER, when the people
were being urged to back the Roosevelt foreign
policy"
Furthermore, it is now divuged that EVEN
Mr.. ROOSEVELTS STATE DEPARTMENT
had not been consulted by him in making the
compact
This in the words of Mr. Suzberger, is what
went on at Casablanca:
"Mr. Roosevelt ardently urged the adoption
of an unconditional surrender policy by the
Allies; MIR. Churchill was reluctant to support
such an Out-and-out statement especially on the
advice of Air Chief Marshal Sir Robert Brooke
POpham
ut was felt that this would tend to negate
the moral effect of the Allies aerial bombing of
Germany by stiffening the Germans resolve.
Finally, however, Mr.. Churchill agreed to
accept and endorse this policy.
CAS- a quid pro quo he insisted that, AS
BETWEEN BRITAIN AND THE UNITED
STATES, Britain have COMPLETE CHARGE of
the Allies military operations and cOrOlary
diplomatic policy in the Balkans.
WELT - '' 'OOON
"The state department was not informed of
this agreement for some time.
I'm fact, the first time Secretary Cordell Hull
heard about it when the United States was
preparing to ship some lend-lease materials for
Turkey and the Earl of Halifax told him that
THIS MUST BE CLEARED THROUGH BRIT.
AIN UNDER THE CASABLANCA AGREE
MENT."
After the Casablanca conference, the Sulzber-
ger dispatch continues, the influence and prestige
of our government in the Balkans steadily de-
Perforated
"The United States" said Mr.. Sulzberger,
"was playing relatively NEGLIGIBLE ROLE
of SECONDARY NATURE in Balkan affairs .
"Thus, in effect, American military and espe-
cially diplomatic policy in the Balkans :. became
to all intents and purposes A ZERO -.
THUS, as far the great powers went,
policies in those regions became matter virtually
for BIPARTITE NEGOTIATION BETWEEN
MOSCOW 7 nNnON