Evening star., 1949-02-07
Austriu as Indicator?

Perhaps 1t is the hope which Springs
eternal In the human breast" that invests
with optimistic expectations the inter-
national conference scheduled to begin
today In London, representatives of the
big Four" (America, Britain, France, and
Soviet Russia) are meeting to discuss a
peace treaty for Austria which would re-
establish her sovereignty and end their
quadripartite occupation that has lasted
since the close of the late war.
This is emphatically not the first of
such meetings Four-Power talks on an
Austrian treaty began three years ago.
And if the affairs of our postwar world
were conducted in spirit of fairness and
good-faith, an Austrian peace treaty would
have been a routine matter. For long
before the end of the war, the Great
Powers had mutually pledged themselves
to restore Austrian independence and
sovereignty Their postwar military oc-
cupation of Austria, though similar in
form to that of Germany, was explicitly
differentiated in character. It was an
nounced as a temporary measure to help
country just freed of Nazism to get on
its feet And in conformity with this
laudable purpose, the occupying powers
permitted the holding of free elections
which chose a government formally rec
ognized by the .occupiers.
The way thus seemed clear for the quick
negotiating of peace treaty that would
have given Austria full international
status Then came an unpleasant surprise
in the shape of Russian demands which,
lnI N
tria into satellite of the Soviet Union
and would likewise have mutilated the
country by carving of a large slice of It's
small territory for annexation to Yugo-
slavia. Branding those demands as both
exorbitant and contrary to prior mutual
agreements, the Western Powers resolutely
rejected them. But Moscow stubbornly
refused to abate or compromise. The re-
suit was chronic deadlock which came to
climax last May, when the Western
Powers broke off the discussions as fruit
less.
In mid-autumn the Austrian Govern
ment began sounding out the occupying
powers as to the possibility of resuming
their negotiations. Its reasons for so
doing have never been disclosed, but our
State Department presently took the ini-
tiative by sending identic notes to the
other occupiers suggesting renewal of
negotiations. London and Paris at once
agreed, and Moscow presently gave its
assent. So the talks start up once more.
Since Moscow has, from the first, been
the only obstacle to an equitable settle
ment, speculation naturally centers around
its motive for resuming the negotiations.
A more amenable attitude on its part
would be an excellent way of showing the
peaceful intentions which Soviet spokes-
men have been proclaiming of late. Yet,
with Moscow, experience has indicated so
wide a gap between word and deed that
hope had best be tempered by skepticism
until the attitude of its negotiators in
London has been revealed Soviet diplo-
macy has seldom been loath to confer
and talk. And it risks nothing by re-
entering a conference on the same terms
as before.
A wait-and-see attitude would thus seem
indicated as the wisest for observers The
stand taken by the Soviet representatives
should soon show what is in Moscow'S
IND