The Wilmington morning star., 1947-04-09
VandenbergRe uerses
Stand
BY JAMES REsTON

wise ways and MEALS VI SStlluS OSlldtoI Al
thur Vandenberg's support for a strong and
liberal international security organization at
San Francisco.
Today Senator Vandenberg was trying to
devise some way Of getting the Truman Ad-
ministration to go along with his proposal
to make the United Nations stronger and
more liberal than it is.
In the series Of conferences that preceded
the San Francisco conference the officials OF
the Government were emphasizing to the Re-
publican Senator from Michigan that he could
rely on the American veto to protect the
sovereign rights and freedom of action of the
United States.
Today the Senator, having accepted that
principle and then some, was having some
difficulty in persuading these same officials
that there were times when it was advisable
to give up our sovereign rights and our free
dom in order to build up the authority and
prestige OF the United Nations.
The issue-and it is a fundamental one
came up over Mr.. Vandenberg's proposed
amendment to the Presidents Greek-Turkish
loan bill. Having listened to a great many
sincere and some i%nsincere complaints that
the United States plan or Greece and Turkey
would bypass the United Nations, Mr.. Van
denberg took the. sef-proclaimed champions
Of the United Nations at their word.
He introduced an amendment under which
the President would be authorized to with
draw the aid to Greece and Turkey eff re-
quested by a procedural vote in the Security
Council or a majority vote in the General
Assembly Of the United Nations"
In these words, the Vandenberg amendment
is inadmissible because under the United Ma
tons Charter such a question would be de-
cided not by a procedural vote in the Sc
curity Council but by a substantive vote'
which the British, for example. could veto:
and not by a majority vote in the General
Assembly but by a two-thirds vote.
But these technical difficulties could easily
be removed. The intent of the amendment is
clear. What the Senator wants the President
to do is to say now, with Congressional ap-
proval, that if 81 per cent of the members
OF the Assembly or any seven members OF
the Security Council express formally their
opposition to our Greek-Turkish plan, we will,
regardless of anybody's veto, agree in ad-
vance to abide by the sentiment Of the AS
sembly or the Council.
What he wants those who have been argu-
ing for the United Nations in the Greek-Turk-
ish debate to do is put up or shut up"
If they really wsnt to strengthen the United
Nations. as they say: if they really want to
uphold the prestige and authority Of the
United Nations as they insist; if they really
want to protect our moral position" as they
maintain; and if they are truly concerned not
to set a bad precedent that will tear down
the United Nations to establish good prece-
dents that will build it up, here, says the
Senator, is a fair, reasonably safe and dra-
matte way to implement the Presidents pro-
gram and at the same time do what the
critics say they want to do.
For example, it is argued that if the United
States goes into Greece and Turkey On its
own because it feels there isn't time to go
before the United Nations, the Russians might
some day be ummone to aid a m
government against Right Wing" opposition
and likewise contend that they have to be-
cause there is mo time to 60 before the
United Nations.
But, says Senator Vandenberg, if we go
into Greece and Turkey with the advance
promise that we will abide by the sentiment
of any seven members Of the Security Coun-
ell or any resolution approved by 81 per cent
of the members of the General Assembly,
we shall have set an example that we would
be glad to have any other nation follow in
the future.
The argument that is being made against
the Vandenberg amendment-other than the
correctable technical point that, as now word
ed, it contradicts the regulations of the Char
ter-is that it goes too far; that, as Senator
Harry F. Byrd of Virginia said today, it would
give the United Nations authority to counter
mand a decision of the United States Con-
gresS.
The United Nations could do this, however.
only if Congress, in advance, decided to give
it this authority, and if Congress refused to
do so, it would be difficult for members Of
Congress to continue to argue that they were
against the Greek-Turkish loans because they
by-passed and minimized the authority OF the
United Nations.
The other arguments against the Vanden-
berg amendment are % that 1t might defeat
our Greek-Turkish plan; and CD that it might
obligate us to follow all future majority de-
cisions in the Security Council without the
protection Of the veto.
The truth of the matter is, however. that
the chances that the United States plan in
Greece and Turkey would be opposed by
seven of the eleven members of the Security
Council are as remote as the possibility that
the United States, at any time in the future,
would wish to adopt a policy that was OPP
posed by a majority of the members OF the
United Nations.
It is true that the Until States Govern
ment cannot, in the present state ct the world,
get consent to abide by majorit- United Ma
tons decisions on all future events that can
not be foreseen.
But what Senator Vandenberg is suggesting
is not a general policy of fulfilling all future
decisions taken by any seven members Of the
Security Council but a carefully and spe-
officially limited obligation in Greece and Tur-
key, where he has excellent reasons for be-
Viewing that our policy will be approved by
every member of the Security Council except
the Soviet Union and Poland.
Whatever happens to the Vandenberg
amendment, it will symbolic what has hap
pened to the Michigan Senator's international
philosophy in the last tWoy years. And it will,
within the next two weeks, indicate who really
wants to strengthen the United Nations and
how much, and whether Congress is opposed
to the veto or just to the Russian veto.-
New York Times.