Evening star., 1948-10-18
Truman Actions Seen
indicating Bipartisan
Policy Doesn't Exist
non for Vinson Mission
Cited as Example Of How
President Acts on Own
By Darid Laurence

By David Laurence
The debate between Gov. Dewey
and President Truman on the sub
ject of bipartisan foreign policy and
particularly as to who gets the
credit for starting it presupposes
the existence of something of the
sort. The truth is there never
really has been nor is there any
such thing as bipartisan foreign
policy in the literal sense of the
phrase.
Actually what has been called a
bipartisan foreign policy is merely
a commendable restraint in both
parties-a form of political truce
which keeps them from exploiting
to the fullest political advantage
the sins of omission or commission
of one or the other of the parties.
Thus, the isolationist and nonco-
operationist attitude of a SUBJ
stantial segment Of the Republican
Party in Congress with respect to
European aid is q well-known fact,
The Democrats have hammered
away at it but not with any real
emphasis. They may be- afraid Of
reprisals.
Similarly. the fantastic blunder-
ing Of President Yruman and his
Department of State in handling
the Russian problem never has been
fully emphasized by the Republic
cans. They could say it has brought
us to the verge of war.
Impression Is False.
Actually, the impression that
Republicans and Democrats sit
down together and shape foreign
policy is just a piece of camou-
1iage devised to keep foreign powers
from exploiting our own differences
Of opinion. The fact that Chair
man Vandenberg of the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee once
in while sees Secretary Marshall,
or that John Foster Dulles, Gov.
Dewey's close friend and probable
Secretary Of State, goes to Paris
as member Of the American dele
cation to the United Nations, is
merely window dressing for the BIZ
partisan idea.
For the truth is that, under the
American Constitution, there can
be no bipartisan control or re-
sponsibility for what is happening
in the. Executive Branch Of the
Government. President Truman was
well within his rights in thinking
up the scheme to send Chief
Justice Vinson to Moscow without
consulting any Republican.
AS a matter of fact he was well
within his rights in asking for
radio time for a "nonpolitical" an
nouncement when he planned to
send the Chief Justice abroad with
out even consulting his own Secre-
tary Of State. He was legally right
but politically wrong.
Nor did Secretary Marshall dis
cuss the Vinson plan with his Re-
publican colleagues in the delega-
ton before he left Paris to come
home to talk about it with Mr..
Truman. His excuse was that he
thought the plan dead. But, dead
or not, any partner in a business
enterprise who holds his secret
planning or information from an
other partner would not long retain
the confidence or trust of the other.
1t was even worse for Mr. Marshall's
Republican partners in the delega-
ton to learn about 1t first from the
newspapers.
Wallace Incident Recalled.
President Truman did not err
jrst once on this sort of thing
either. He had read ahead of
time Henry Wallace's sensational
speech on foreign policy, delivered
at Madison Square Garden. He
gave it his approval while not only
his own Secretary Of State, James
F. Byrnes, at Paris in the midst of
critical negotiations, but also Sen
ator Vandenberg, were unaware Of
what was happening In the White
House to shape the course of
American foreign policy.
In both the Wallace and Vinson
episodes, America was embarrassed
abroad. But the Republicans have
not exploited either incident to the
fullest extent.
That sort of restraint may be
construed as bipartisan considera-
ton for Americas best interests
abroad. The Presidents behavior,
however, in both cases, and his
blundering rather than the misuse
Of the facts by foreign powers were
what has been mostly covered up
and prevented from doing further
damage.
What the average citizen prob
ably would like, and thinks perhaps
actually exists, is a coalition gov
ernment-a bipartisan council that
directs and manages foreign policy.
This implies intimate familiarity
day by day by both parties with all
phases Of our international rela-
tions.
.It might work under q parliament
tary democracy where the people
have an instant check on their
chosen representatives in the cab
met, but it could hardly be as ef-
fective in a system where for four
years a President has complete
responsibility for what goes on in
the Executive Branch of Govern
ment, and cannot be called into
question by the people in the
interim.
For, no matter how many blund-
ers a President makes, there is
nothing the opposing party can do
about it till the next election-and
very little can be said in criticism,
II it's a matter of foreign policy
without giving to other governments
an impression of disunity.
Reproduction Rights Reserved.)
A THE NUMBER FOR