Evening star., 1947-02-28
Mr.. Bevin's Accusation

=
Mr.. Bevin's Accusation
Because he indicts President Tru-
man and this Government for play
ing domestic politics at the expense
of a real settlement of the problem
of Palestine and the displaced Jews,
British Foreign Secretary Bevin
stands accused Of being tactless,
stupid and offensive. Perhaps he is
all of these things. But still the
question remains: Has he spoken
the truth?
Mr.. Bevin's complaint may be
summed up briefly. Last October he
was especially hopeful that a COM
promise would be worked out be-
tween the Jews and the Arabs.
Then, while in attendance at the
Paris Peace Conference, he was in
formed by Prime Minister Attlee
that President Truman was prepar-
ing. despite an urgent British re-
quest not to do so at that particu-
lar time, to issue statement calling
for the immediate admission OF
100000 Jews to Palestine. MIR.
Bevin went to the then Secretary
of State Byrnes, who was also in
Paris, and begged that the state
ment not be issued. Mr.. Byrnes
replied (the White. House response
to Mr.. Bevin says nothing about
this) that if the President did not
issue his statement a competitive
statement would be issued by Re-
publican Governor Dewey of New
York.
The rest of the story was already
on the record. Mr.. Truman, on Oc-
tober 4, while the congressional elec-
ton campaign was at its peak.
issued his statement. And a few
days later Governor Dewey came
along with the declaration that the
British should admit mot 100000
but several hundreds of thousands"
of Jews to Palestine. ~
In now describing Mr.. Bevin's un-
precedented accusation as most
unfortunate and misleading" the
White House is certainly correct in
declaring that the Presidents Oc-
tober 4 statement merely reaffirmed
a long-standing American position
based on an anxious desire for a
peaceful solution of the Palestine
problem. Yet the fact remains that
the statement was issued at the
height of the elections in pivotal
New York, where the vote of the
Jews is of great Importance. The
fact remains, too, that it was issued
in face of British plea that its
issuance at that moment would be
harmful to Anglo-Arab-Jewish ne
gotiations. On the face of things,
therefore, there was d strong sug-
gestion of domestic politics in 1t, and
many newspapers in this country,
including The Star, said so at the
time. If Mr.. Bevin has accurately
reported Mr.. Byrnes' comment in
Paris, the political angle becomes
sharper than ever.
It, may have been rude of Mr..
Bevin to bring this matter out into
the open. Perhaps it was stupid.
Certainly, from the standpoint of
expediency, it would seem that he
would have been better advised to
have been more circumspect. But
fairness demands that some allow
ance be made for the nerve-strain-
ing and exasperating nature of the
explosive Palestine problem and for
the British feeling that the United
States has not helped any by being
long on offering advice and woe
fully short on concrete support.
Whether or not domestic politics
have greatly colored the American
position, it cannot be denied that
We have fought completely shy of
sharing responsibility with Britain,
in a military sense, if force should
prove necessary-as Britain fears
to put our suggestions into effect.
Possibly, in the long run, Mr..
Bevin's harsh remarks will serve a
good purpose by bringing home to
all of us that the United States will
have to offer more than advice if 1t
wants the Palestine problem solved
to its liking. The sooner we under
stand this, and act accordingly, the
sooner will there be an end to the
tragic plight of some 10000 Jews
not to mention upward of 100000
other displaced persons-who still
sit in the detention camps of Eu-
rope nearly two years after the end
of the war.