The Wilmington morning star. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1909-1990, 1946-04-13
Ministers Farley
BY ANNE O'HARE MCCORMICK

|
| 1t has been evident for weeks that the
Foreign Ministers of the Big Four would have
to meet again before the stalemate in the
peacen1aking can be broken. Although their
deputies have been sitting in London for near.
ly six months, practically no progress has
been made in drafting the treaties with Italy,
Bulgaria, Hungary, Rumania and Finland.
The Foreign Ministers will begin in Paris
where they left off in London. The questions
left hanging in the air when the conference
broke Up in Lancaster House last fall are still
to be answered. But at least the negotiators
! take to Paris more realistic sense of the
, difficulty and gravity of their task
The American delegation to the first confer
ence thought the Italian treaty for instance,
would be easy. They were quite unprepared
for the intense interest in the Mediterranean
settlements which Russia displayed at the
very first session. The immediate demand Of
Mr. Molotoff for Soviet trusteeship over the
italian colony Of Tripolitania took them COM
pletely b. surprise. This notification that Rus
sia's sphere of interest was not confined to
eastern Europe or bounded by the Darda.
nelles upset the prearranged plans for the
London meeting. It may be said to have set
the pattern for the opposition that has not yet
been resolved.
At that time some delegates thought the
Russians were making extreme claims on TIA
ly in order to get their way in the
treaties with the other satellite states Suisse
quent events have exploded that rather naive
theory. Everything that has happened since
the London conference has made palmer that
Russia's unexpected bid for eoothold in
Tripoli, like her support of the Yugoslav de-
mand Tor Trieste like her moves in Iran,
mean simply that she intends to assert and
extend her power in the Mediterranean basin
and the Middle East.
The second meeting of the Foreign Minis
tiers will be different from the first because
it begins with that premise. Secretary Byrnes
does not 60 to Paris with the illusion that
writing any of these treaties will be simple
least Of all the treaty with Italy. Until the
various plans for the Italian settlement were
put on the table, the strategic and political
importance of this populous and impoverished
country, not merely in the structure of Europe
but in the tri-continenta1 world Of the Medi-
terranean, were hardly realized by American
peacemakers. italy was the stumblingb1ock in
London because Russian interest in the Italian
treaty made western statesmen suddenly
aware of the implications Of an eastward
swing Of the italian pendulum. Libva, in itself
the poorest Of colonies, lies handi1y between
Egypt and the French empire. on one hand,
and as the head of the last udeveloped CONT
nent on the other.
Italy is still the stunb1ingblock No treaty
can be drafted because the first clauses of
the first treatv cannot be agreed on. This is
the deadlock Secretary Byrnes has called the
conference in Paris to break He took the
initiative because the deputies would 60 on
marking time forever unless their chiefs reach
an accord.
The Russians are not averse to delays. In
one instance after another, they have favored
postponement-of elections In Germany and
Greece, OF discussion of the 1ranian issues
Of setting up provisional government in Ko.
sea In like manner the Communist parties
in Italy, ir France, in Greece, oppose quick
action on the constitution or the dynastic
question The Soviet government is apparent
ly in no hurry to negotiate peace.
This Is In accord with the Moscow thesis
that the European peace may be ratified or
endorsed bv twentyone nations but that it is
made by Three, with France sitting in on
decisions on Germany and Italy It is because
the Russians are SO answering on this point
that they were ready to fall in with Mr.,
Byrnes' proposal Of four-power parley Thev
consistently prefer the strictly limited council
and the secret council. No doubt they will
also insist on closed sessions But after the
London experience with official secrecy which
forced American correspondents to gather
their information from other sources Mr.
Byrnes will probably wish to line up American
support Cor our position by working for the
widest possible publicity for the discussions
in Paris.
So far the stalemate on the treaties is
stalemate between the Great Powers It is
their ideas, their interests, that are in con-
fhct. So far there is too little evidence that
the future of the countries concerned or
whether the settlements will conduce to a dur
able or endurable peace are primarily con-
slderations. Another question must worry
those who look ahead: how can these piece
meal settlements be made without reference
to the general settlement in which they must
be fitted? It's like building lot of separate
rooms before the house is planned How fix
frontiers before setting up the structure Of
Europe ard knowing whether there is to be
one Europe or two? How dispose of colonies
until there is pattern for the administration
of colonies? How fix the conditions under
which nations must live except in conformity
with some scheme by which they will be able
to live? There is room for grave doubt whether
the time has come for definitive hard-and-fas -
treaties for any country. There can be M
doubt that the time is overdue for the Biy
Three to calm the fears and doubts If The
world by giving an example of power devoted
to the construction of design OF peace -
New York Times
Editorial Comment
ArOund On Gnrpar