Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1957-11-29
Common CompuIsion

The troubles now beSetting the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization,
particularly between France on one
hand and Britain and the United States
on the other, have always been inherent
in all sorts of alliances. Personalities
have little to do with the matter. for
whenever riffs or quarrels occur in any
coalition they occur primarily because
of real or fancied clash between the
separate national interests and the
common interests of the coalitions
members.
In the case of NATO, for example,
the Anglo-French-A American stresses
and strains have not been caused by
Secretary Dulles alleged bumbling or
by British Prime Minister Macmillan's
failure, on his latest visit to Paris, to
win the heart of Premier Gaillard and
settle all differences with him. The
situation involves considerations much
deeper than that. For the rift, such as
it is, has been brought about not by
anybody's personality, or lack of it, but
by number of basic policy disagree
mentS, including especially the dispute
over military shipments to Tunisia.
This dispute revolveS around the
Anglo American decision to send small
quantities OF arms to President Bour-
guiba's pro-WeStern government in
TuniS. The French have reacted Bit
terly. AS they see it, the decision con-
StituteS an affront to them by their
two chief allies, and they profess to
fear that it will be harmful to their /.
vital interests in Algeria, politically,
pSychologically, militarily and other
wise. But by the same token, having
in mind the vital interests of the entire
Atlantic alliance, including their own
vital interests and those of France as
well, Britain and the United States have
felt impelled to respond afflrmatively
to TuniSia'S request lest TuniSia turn
to the Soviet bloc for the weapons it
wants-a development that would make
1t easier for the Kremlin to spread its
COMMUNICATING influence farther
westward through North Africa.
The Anglo French American diff
ferenceS, OF course, are not the only
ones that agitate NATO. A comparable
dispute is the Cyprus issue that divides
Greece and Britain and Turkey. And
there are other actual and potential
riffs within the alliance. They are riffs
of varying degrees of seriousness, all
involving conflicting national interests.
This is trouble of kind that coali-
tion-particularly when it embraces a
wide variety of countries, including
former enemies-can hardly hope to
avoid In that sense, therefore, the
Atlantic communityS difficulties are not
really surprising; nor are they so great
that they cannot be surmounted before
they lead to a dangerous deterioration
or breakup.
In any event, NATOS members all
belong to one family-the family of free
nations-and although some of them
are sharply at odds over internal issues,
they still share great and over-rid-
ing common compulSion to hold fast
together against the external Soviet
threat. Everything they cherish depends
upon their doing that. Quarrel as they
may among themselves, this is fact
that they agree upon, and because they
do agree upon 1t, there is ample reason
to hope and believe that they will act
accordingly. in unison, to keep on living
In freedom.