DIRECT TALKS

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 68, Issue 186, 19 May 1948, Page 3

DIRECT TALKS

SOVIET AND U.S. RELATIONS Stalin Replies To Wallace i _____ (N.Z.P. A.—Copyright). LONDON, May 18. Mr Stalin, in a personal letter to Mr Henry Wallace, describes an open letter which Mr Wallace recently addressed to him as the most important among political documents of recent times which have as their aim the consolidation of peace, the setting-up of international co-operation, and the ensuring of democracy. Mr Stalin’s letter, which was quoted by the Moscow radio, is dated May 17. Mr Wallace, in hie letter to Mr Stalin, urged Russia and the United States to end the cold war and ensure “a century of peace.” * . “Mr Stalin’s reply to Mr Wallace seems to prove that Moscow is determined to make the United States Government shoulder the responsibility of rejecting the Soviet ‘peace offer’,” says Reuter’s , diplomatic correspondent. “By, accepting Mr Wallace’s programme ae ‘a good and fruitful basis’ for Spviet-American agreement, Mr Stalin lms avoided one of the United States Government’s main objections to direct talks, namely, that such talks would serve no purpose unless ‘they were concrete Soviet proposals for removing outstanding differences/

“It is felt in London that some official redefinition of the United States attitude to Moscow’s initiative for direct talks js now inevitable.” The Washington correspondent of ,the United Press, however, United States Government officials said privately that Mr Stalin’s statement; in no way changed their attitude —that the United States should avoid any kind of “peace talks” with Russia until the balance of power is retored in Europe and the preponderance of that power is held in the West. Steps to End War

Mr Wallace proposed that the United States and the Soviet take the following steps to end the Cold war : (1) A general reduction of armaments and the outlawing of all methods of mass destruction. (2) The prohibition of arms exports by any nation. (3) The resumption of unrestricted trade between the United States and .Russia. (4) The free movement of citizens, students, an<\ journalists ’between the two countries. (5) The resumption of the free exchange of scientific information and material. ' • ' , (6) The establishment of another United Nations agency to distribute international relief. (7k Speedy peace settlements with Germany and Japan, and the withdrawal of occupation troops wthin a year. (8) The withdrawal of American and Russian troops, from China and- Korea and tfie establishment of a government, for all Korea. (9) Pledges by the United States and the Soviet that they have no territorial designs on any other nations. Mr Wallace urged that there should be an open and fully reported meeting of American and Soviet representatives. • Concrete Programme Mr Stalin says that the inadequacy of the recent exchanges between the* Soviet Foreign Minister (Mr Molotov) and the United States Ambassador in Moscow (General Bedell Smith) consists in the fact that they go no further tha’n declaring the desirability of settling Soviet-American differences. Mr Stalin says that Mr Wallace’s letter 'cannot be said to embrace all questions of difference, but that that is not the most important thing at the present time: The main thing is that Mr Wallace makes*an open and honest attempt to give a concrete programme for a peaceful settlement —concrete proposals on all basic questions of difference between the Soviet and the United States.

' Mr Stalin says:. “It is possible to agree and disagree with Mr Wallace’s programme, but one thing is nevertheless beyond doubt. There is no statesman caring for peace and co-opera-tion among peoples "who can ignore this programme, since it reflects the hcfpes and strivings of the peoples toward the consolidation of peace, and it doubtless will have the support of many millions of ordinary people.

“I do not know whether the United States Government approves Mr Wallace’s programme as a basis for agreement between the Soviet and the United States. As far as’ the Government. of the Soviet -is concerned, it considers that Mr Wallace’s programme could serve as a good and fruitful basis for such an agreement and for the development of international co-operation, since the Government of the Soviet considers that, in spite of the difference? in economic systems and ideologies, the co-existence of these systems and the peaceful settlement of differences between the Soviet and the United States are not only possible but also doubtlessly necessary' in the interests of general peace.” Surprise Expressed

When Mr Wallace was shown newspaper accounts of Mr Stalin’s reply, he commented: “If I have done anything that moves the world further toward peace’ I feel that my campaign will have been a success.”

Mr Wallace, who expressed surprise that Mr Stalin had replied, also remarked that pex*haps world diplomats should examine his letter to Mr Stalin. Mi* Wallace said that Mr Stalin’s comment actually was not addressed to him. “This is a statement by the Premier of Russia to the people of the United States, offering peace. It is a real, definite offer by Russia to sit down and discuss our differences to find ways and means of ending the .cold war.”

STALIN’S REPLY ENCOURAGING

STATE DEPARTMENT’S VIEWS

(Rec. 12.30) WASHINGTON, May IS. The State Department announced today that Stalin’s latest statement on peace—in reply to Mr Wallace's, open

letter to him —was encouraging, but the issues proposed for settlement did not staffd between the United States and the Soviet alone. The issues listed by Stalin had been under negotiation for two years or more in the United Nations, the Council of Foreign Ministers and elsewhere. The department directly blamed the Soviet for failure to reach agreement, instancing the Soviet and the Ukraine’s blocking of agreement on atomic energy control.

The department added: “A similar situation exists regarding other issues mentioned in Stalin’s statement.”-