SIX-POINT PLAN INTERESTS U.S.A.

Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 24793, 6 February 1946, Page 6

SIX-POINT PLAN INTERESTS U.S.A.

PEACE

[By

A. D. ROTHMAN.

Washington Correspondent of the “Sydney Morning Herald.”]

(Published by Arrangement.)

A six-point peace plan made by Herbert Elliston, Associate Editor of the “Washington Post,” and one of America’s most distinguished journalists, is arousing extraordinary attention here. At least two of President Truman’s Cabinet Ministers. Mr Harold Ickes and Mr Henry Wallace, have underwritten Elliston’s plan, which is at present receiving the widest discussion.

Pointing out that the United States writ of supremacy as a world Power has only five years to run because of changes which atomic energy promises. Elliston says the way must be prepared for the transfer of power to a world authority within that period. After that, according to scientific estimates, the possession of the atomic bomb by all nations will inevitably lead to an equalisation of power. The greatest, indeed, may then become the weakest, and the United States will be the logical target for an aggressor. The task, therefore, consists primarily in proving to the world American Willingness to internationalise the atomic bomb and demonstrating once again the full destructive force of the weapon itself, which apparently has not made sufficient impression on mankind. Suppress Atomic Bomb

The plan offers, first, that the manufacture of the atomic bomb be stopped at once and an announcement to that effect be made. This, Elliston says, would be the best assurance to Russia that the American aim is to internationalise the bomb, and would “speed procedure into the programme by a gesture of good faith. For, if political progress In respect of the atomic bomb lags behind scientific facts, consideration might have to be given to a union of those Powers that will harmonise their atomic interests.” Second, the United States should conduct a naval demonstration at once of the destructiveness of the atohiic bomb. “The fact is that to some people Hiroshima was not enough of a mental catalyst,” he says.

Realising the necessity of RussoAmerican equilibrium in preparation for and concurrently with the greater task of establishing a world community, Elliston insists that other nations are “far more afraid of Russia and America falling out than of a RussoAmerican front.” Russia’s security requirements must, consequently, be determined. A study of these requirements shows that the only point where Russia’s security chain is still incomplete iS'in the Middle East —the Dardanelles ans Persian Gulf. The third stipulation in his programme, therefore, offers an economic programme for the Middle East, together with a plan for Britain's economic revival and colonial liquidation. In the Middle East, British and Rusr sian aims “may at any time come into head-on conflict,” he says. “Tensions are mounting. . . . The complexity of

the Middle East cries aloud for American initiative in basic, comprehensivc terms.” Specifically he suggests that the United States offer a plan for ecbnomic development, including a Transjordan Valley Authority on the Tennessee Valley Authority model which might absorb the problem of Palestine internationalisation of Middle East oil in a corporation chartered by the United Nations, transformation of colonial wells in mandated areas into trusteeships responsible to the United Nations, and transformation of Mediterranean bases into United Nations bases. Ho goes on to say that, “as long as Britain lags in economic revival she is bound to be a drag on our foreign policy.” citing examples of Britain’s objections to overt moves against Franco’s Spain and Peron’s Argentina, because of Britain’s economic hardships. The recent Anglo-American loan agreement, more or less along Wall Street lines, could have been turned into a “straight-out swap’’ beneficial to both sides. Elliston asserts that the British should have offered the United States bases and part-owner-ship in Middle East oil in return for “vitamins and dollars.”

The fourth point of Elliston’s plan consists in the encouragement of private international business and banking corporations which might be chartered by the United Nations. He mentions the possibility of establishing an international air transport company, the development of banks, an international corporation for the exploitation, of uranium deposits, etc. They would serve the public interest by promoting common interests across the frontiers, and safeguards against selfishness would be provided by regulation and overseership by the United Nations.

Loan to Russia Fifthly, Elliston turns to Russia’s economic situation, and proposes a loan to the U.S.S.R. by the United States. The Russians would, through fcuch a loan, be enabled to gain the aim Marshal Stalin emphasised to Mr Byrnes at Moscow—a living standard comparable with that of average Europeans. The United States. m*ust give Russia manufacturing equipment and knowhow—in return, she will help to develop the country, which is bound to become a major source of American imports. Thus American resources could be nursed, and a dynamic cycle of world-wide action will be started. ■ Finally, Mr Elliston insists on the free exchange of information. “Darkness has no place In the atomic age,” he says, and though aware of the difficulty in persuading Russia to open news sources, he admonishes American diplomacy to be unafraid when it is right. Reciprocity “can be brought to realisation, by forceful diplomatic - initiative conducted throughout the world,” he says.