Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1956-09-28


has been in the forefront Of
new emergencies. But is the
situation new?
The procedure follows the
old Kremlin line. First, re-
pudiate a solemn and binding
agreement. Secondly, adopt
restrictive measures offensive
to the West. But now q third
item is added. namely, to
charge the West with agrees
sion and boycotting.
In similar instances neither
the Kremlin nor its satellites
have had the CUTS to make
such charges. Yet. if memory
serves us. Russia threw away
its pledges, attempted to force
West Germany to join Com
munist Germany (claimed as
now belonging to RUSSIA, and
placed burdens upon railroad
and highway trafiic to prevent
aid from the West.
We refused to fight then.
We are refusing to fight now.
And the results, again, will be
victory. We used the air lift
to feed the free portions Of
Berlin. and we can go around
the Honor around the
world-to provide the Western
world with its needs.
Let Russia supply the ship
ping to keep the Suez open.
and provide Nasser with money
to build his dam. It can't be
done. If the needs Of those
behind the Iron Curtain are
also to be met.
Fortunately we have some
one in the White House who
believes in peaceful solutions
for problems of lesser import
than those involving loss of
freedom. r. r. W.
4 4 ~
One would think that every
one had learned during the
30s and 4Os that it is impos-
sible to satisfy a dictator by
appeasement. Appeasement
was tried with Hitler and Mus
solini, but it was found that
the more they were appeased,
the more they demanded.
1t seems, however. that Eli
senhower, his heir apparent
and Dulles learned little if
anything about dictators from
the worlds experiences Of two
decades ago. This administra-
ton is not only trying to APP
pease Nasser, but it is also an
nouncing to the world in gen.
eral, and Nasser in particular,
that no matter how far Nasser
may go with his aggression,
we will not only refuse to help
England and France resist him
but we will also give him moral
support.
That policy may save us long
enough to get Eisenhower
elected, but we will pay an
awful penalty later.
Ernest C. Arnold.
Reading Mr.. Dulles speech
at the second London confer
ence about the so-called users
association plan, and viewing
1t against the background Of
the present Suez crisis, one
gets the impression that Mr..
Dulles did not mean what he
said. and he did not say what
he meant.
Having studied the recent
Developments in the Suez
crisis. and in particular the
adamant stands Of Egypt and
those of Britain and France, I
believe that in the long run
the United States does not at
all stand to gain.
One thing Is clear: If the
United States persists in her
gamble or tactics, whatever
you may call what she is now
pursuing. it certainly will not
be the United States but Rus
STA that ultimately will gain.
Egypt may fall into the
Soviet orbit and accept all
sorts Of aid from Russia. Just
because Of her resentment
against the West.
The United States should be
watchful lest she slip into a
pitfall cleyerly planned by the
British.
It will be q pity indeed should
the seeds Of good will already
sown in the hearts Of millions
Of Asians and Africans be
washed away By the unneces-
sary artificial ways and means
that are now being employed
by Mr.. Dulles. just in order To
appease the British and the
French.
Those with open minds know
too well that the users as
ISOLATION plan engineered BY
Mr.. Dulles was only . pretext
It is not genuine. It is not
well meant. for the sake Of
preserving peace IN the Mid.
east area.
~ Kari LudWig. J