Evening star., 1947-09-26
Senator Tofts Tacoma Speech on H. S. Foreiqn POLICY

eign Policy |.
an itching desire on the part Of the
administration to tell the rest Of the
world how 1t shall run its affairs.
Dominated by 'Mr. Fixit."
As I see it the administration was
dominated by the Mr.. Fixit" phil
osophy OF the New Deal. Just as the
New Dealers wanted to run the lives
OF all citizens and improve them
whether they wished to be improved
or not, so have they tried to use
our financial resources to force on
the rest Of the world the manner
IN which they shall conduct their
foreign exchange, their foreign
trade, and even their currency and
other domestic affairs. No doubt we
have acted in good faith in SUD-
porting an international control of
international trade, but to Europe
it looks like an American control
trying to boss their affairs.
I maintain, therefore, that out
side the actual conduct of the war.
we could not have made a worse
mess OF our foreign policy than we
did. The only bright spots are
Gen. MacArthur's conduct of the
occupation Of Japan and the estab-
lishment of the United Nations, and
the recent agreement signed at Rio
True, Senator Vandenberg and the
bipartisan policy finally reversed
our whole attitude toward Russia to
one OF firmness, and was responsible
for reversing our policy in Germany
But even In these restricted fields
the bipartisan foreign policy was
up against handicaps previously i'm
posed, which have, up to now. pre-
vented any solution Of those prob
lens.
1t may be asked, what is the Re-
publican foreign policy? I have
said that under a Democratic Presi-
dent its keystone is cooperation
I have tried to point out that foreign
policy should not be partisan. Of
course, when we reach the time
OF the presidential election, 1t will
be incumbent on the Republican
Party to state the manner in which
1t will conduct the country's foreign
policy, but in the meantime I see no
reason why it should do more than
declare certain general principles.
ana oppose measures which it con-
siders completely dangerous to the
welfare Of the country. Even when
a Republican President Is elected
we must recognize that there is
no panacea to solve the present
confusion from past error.
Guiding Principle.
But certain general principles can
be stated which have succeeded In
the past. My own belief is that the
guiding principle of any foreign
policy should be the maintenance
OF peace so long as conditions do
not threaten the freedom of the
people of the United States. In
my opinion that has not been the
guiding principle of our foreign pol
icy IN the last is years. Short of
the loss Of freedom, war is the
greatest destroyer Of all ideals
This was has cost us SOC, 900 lives,
hundreds of thousands Of perma-
nently disabled, and the happiness
OF many families. It has cost us
$250, ,000, ,000, 900 CT debt. It has i'm
posed upon us q current financial
budget for interest, veterans, armed
forces and foreign aid so heavy as
to threaten the successful continu-
alton Of a system Of free enter
prise. It has brought destruction to
many parts Of the world.
In the end that destruction must
1njure us also. Successful though
we were in all the military phases
OF the war. we face a condition
IN the world today not much less
threatening than existed In 1910.
Even the nation that wins q war,
loses the war. That nation must
abandon at least temporarily the
very freedoms for which the war
Is fought; and once abandoned we
have found that those freedoms
are not easy to recover.
Emphasis On Justice.
I believe our foreign policy should
be built around the United Nations,
changing the whole emphasis of the
organization to the establishment
Of law and equal justice under law.
Only then could we consider. the
abandonment of the veto power.
I do not see how we can abandon
our own veto power, and thereby
give a majority Of the Security
Council the right over our objection
to carry through an unjust attack
on the United States or any other
nation. There must first be a
law written and agreed to by all
dealing with the subject on which
the veto is waived. That Is not
impossible. A beginning has been
made to writing q definition of
aggression at Rio de Janeiro. The
American Legion has proposed q
number OF amendments to the
Charter moving In the direction
I have indicated.
OF course, we face q situation in
the present Russian attitude which
makes progress along this line diffi-
cult. If it becomes Impossible, If
Russia In effect withdraws from any
real participation In effective action
by the United Nations, believe we
should proceed without Russia to
perfect a United Nations which will
operate in a limited field. We have
perfected such an organization with
the Latin American nations, which
may serve as an example to the
rest of the world. But am hope
full that in time there may be