Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1947-12-16
For Peace in Two Worlds

The London meeting OF foreign ministers
has ended in bleak failure for reason
that is at once simple and obvious. AS
Secretary Marshall has said, France,
Britain and the United States were ready
and eager to make it succeed, but Russia
was not, and that is the sum of the story.
From the moment the conference
opened Foreign Minister Molotov seemed
certain to adhere to line calculated to
kill It, That he did so is not really sur
prising but it is instructive. 1t makes
clear beyond doubt that the Soviet Union
at this juncture-unless it can have its
own way-has no desire to write an
Austrian peace treaty or to make definite
beginning on German settlement.
This policy can hardly be explained as
anything but policy designed to keep the
Red Army deep In Europe as long as pos
sible and to promote and perpetuate alb
normal conditions in order to make it
easier for the Kremlin to entrench and
spread its dominance as far west as it can.
1t is not peace policy; it is wrecking
policy-a policy that the western powers
could never accept without surrendering
the continent.
1t is policy, moreover, that the Rus
slams appear determined to pursue for
long time to come. 1t fits in perfectly with
their worldwide program of obstruction,
noncollaboration and vilifying propaganda
against the United States, Britain, France
and all other like-minded nations The
spirit that animates it Is the same spirit
that animates the Soviet position in Korea,
the Soviet paralysis of atomic control, the
Soviet boycott of the Balkan watchdog"
commission, and the violent Soviet opposi-
ton to such great undertakings as the
projected long-range European Recovery
Program. The collapse of the London
Conference serves merely to round out the
picture and to indicate that the men of
the Kremlin, far from having a change for
the better in mind, are bent on following
lone-wolf course, come what may.
In such circumstances, there seems little
or no reason to hope for a near-future
bridging of the gulf between East and West
The idea we must now get used to is that
this situation-this grim division of the
worlds not likely to end for many years,
If ever. The failure at London leaves scant
room for doubt that the dream of collective
security on global scale, with all lands
working together, is still only dream, and
very remote one at that. This does not
mean however, that mankind has had it's
last chance for an enduring peace and has
lost 1t. War is not inevitable by anv
means. America and the other free and
independent countries of the earth have
overwhelming power among them, and
there are things they can do to insure
their common safety
France, Britain and the United States
Tor instance, can now unity their three
zones in Germany into a great force for
the good OF the continent. The 16-nation
European Recovery Program can be
ef1ectuated. We can see to it, through the
machinery of the United Nations and our
own American efforts, that countries like
Greece and Italy are not robbed of their
independence. We can cultivate powerful
economic and political ties with our friends
abroad and with them we can intensity
international programs designed to spread
more and more light behind the iron cur
tain. Above ALL always leaving the door
open for an agreement with Russia, we can
maintain our military readiness at the
level demanded by the present situation
II program of this sort is carried out
by the United States and like-minded
powers, at least part of the world-a large
part-Will be able to organize its own svs-
tenn of collective security and it may even
succeed in eventually persuadng the Rus
SLAMS to come in. The eff involved is
crucial one, of course, and there is no
certainty that 1t will be met. Assuming
the best, however, the cooperating
nations can do much to guarantee their
own safety even if the Soviet Union chooses
to keep the globe split in two. Grave as it
is, the London failure does not Justify
despair We still can have peace if we
work for it,.