Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1954-07-12

ested in preserving the safety and se-
curity Of such countries as India and
a future Red China than their own
country. OF course they both denied
any intention to favor the entry Of Red
China into the q. NJ now, but both
held that such might be feasible in the
future
Senator Fulbright even went So far
as to question how we could permit
Soviet Russia to remain in the United
Nations and be against the admission
Of Red China. He seems to think that
the admission of two evils will make
one right. The reasoning Of Senators
Knowland and johnson he has called
evidence of political immaturity."
Perhaps 1t Is some kind of immaturity
to those who are in the internationaIist
circle-either by choice or by British
tieS-for pro-AmericanS to favor the
especially when that favoritism is for
United States over other countries and
the United States over the Red coun-
tries and their followers. Perhaps the
internationalists think it is immature
to favor the Constitution of the United
States and the Declaration of indie
should scrap those two sacred docu-
ments in favor of the anti-God, anti
American Charter of the United Ma
tons That, so the Fulbrights reason,
would be political maturity.
Tom Coll.
Senator Knowland's inpetuous state
ment about withdrawing from the
United Nations if Red China is admit
ted may have been intended only as
bluff to block any move toward I'M
seating the Chinese Nationalist. But
his statement can in no way be helpful
in solidifying American public opinion
behind the great organization of the
U. N. And help indeed is needed in
view of the fact that many impatient
Americans seem ready now to scrap
the U. N. because they have been too
lazy to investigate the organizations
many omplishments, and they are
willing only to look at the more publi-
cized diSagreementS and the weaknesses
in some Of the organizations structure.
That there is weakness in the struc-
ture of the u. N. there can be no doubt.
And it seems to me that one of the
ity over the military everywhere It
seems ridiculous and asinine and illogi-
cal that nations must maintain the
huge military machines which today
are sprawled all over the world. Why
then are these vast military establish
ments maintained? Basically, they are
maintained because of fear and because
of the natural tendency toward self
preservation. But are we getting any
real self-protection in this age of the
hydrogen bomb when military build-ups
seem only to lead to war and the at
tendant inhumanity and chaos which
follows? think not, and believe it is
time for us to make reappraisal of
our whole situation in the light of the
functions of the United Nations.
The primary purpose of the U. N. is
to maintain the peace. But until the
U. N. has full power over the military.
! do not believe we will have peace.
Our goal, therefore, should be to work
toward strengthening the authority of
the United Nations so that the defense
prerogatives of individual nations may
be gradually relinquished and trans
ferred to this world body. Only at that
time can the nations, in security, re-
lease the vast blocks of military man
power to more productive pursuits, and
only then can they in safety effect
tremendous savings in their economy.
For with all the world disarmed, the
U. N. police force would neither have
to be large nor expensive to be effec-
tive.
It is time for all people who sincerely
desire peace to stand up and be counted.
And while there are, undoubtedly. some