U.S. UNDERTAKINGS IN ATLANTIC PACT

Press, Volume LXXXV, Issue 25734, 21 February 1949, Page 7

U.S. UNDERTAKINGS IN ATLANTIC PACT

Reported Assurances By Mr Acheson STEPS IN EVENT OF ATTACK ON ANY SIGNATORY (N.Z. Press Association—Copyright) (Rec. 8 p.m.) WASHINGTON, February 19. The United States Secretary of State (Mr Dean Acheson) ta-day discussed the North Atlantic Pact with the ambassadors of Britain, Canada France, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxemburg. The United Press of America quotes reliable informants as saying that Mr Acheson assured the meeting that the United States was willing to sign a pact “with teeth in it.” 1° JI* e correspondent, Mr Acheson said the United States would not stand idly by if an aggressor attacked any of the signatory Powers. The United States favoured adoption of the principle that an attack on one treaty nation should be considered an attack on all the others. Mr Acheson stressed, however, that Congress alone had final authority to declare war for the United States. lhe United Press adds: “These informants reported that Mr Acheson had outlined immediate steps which the United States would take if any signatory were attacked. These were: prompt consultation with the other signatory Powers, possibly a transfer of arms,, and the application of drastic diplomatic and economic sanctions.against any aggressor. The Washington correspondent of the “New York Times” says: “The Atlantic Powers, the State Department, and the Senate Foreign Relations Committee appear to have moved closer together on the drafting of the pact. To-day’s meeting gave Mr Acheson an opportunity to explain that the language of the pact need not exclude a reference to the possibility of United States military aid. With the main issues of the pact settled, there will be less difficulty in defining other measures which the United States might be prepared to take short of the automatic use of military force.” The “New York Times,” in a leading article, says: “Neither • North Atlantic nor any other treaty is likely to rob Congress of its power to declare war or refuse to declare war. But there should be no doubt, here or in any other country, that if a specified aggression takes place we will consider it our business to resist, and that this resistance, if necessary, will take the form of military action. It is this certainty, rather than any form of words, that is at present the world’s greatest promise for peace.” Mr Bevin’s Hopes Of Atlantic Pact .

“PEACE FOR GENERATIONS” BELIEVED POSSIBLE

(Rec. 8 p.m.) LONDON, Feb. 19. Because of the Russian attitude Britain had to turn to people with whom she could work and who wanted to work with her, said the Foreign Secretary (Mr Ernest Bevin), speaking at Bristol. “Therefore we are now in the process of trying to create an Atlantic community—a vast community, a great industrial community, a powerful community,’’ he said. “I want to feel that America and the others who join the pact are together contributing to 'each other’s welfare. If we achieve this, if the West and other peace-loving nations get together now, and get complete understanding, and co-ordinate their defence efforts, I assert that there will be no war for 100 years. “If we get co-operation instead of , going into conferences and listening to abuse, as we have had to do, we shall sit down and do business. Others will live their way, we shall live ours, and peace will be assured for generations to come. “We don’t want to do this for war. We shall attack no one. But we are aiming not to be attacked by anyone. That is our policy. We shall never be aggressors—we never have. “Nothing would have given me such pleasure as to have got political decency and co-operation, to have been

joining with every country in the world for economic recovery and rehabilitation. “Britain is in the process of a veritable economic revolution. We have had to face the issue that because of the dollar problem and our own difficulties. certain countries have wanted to charge higher prices. At times we have had to refuse to buy, and we may have to refuse to buy again, rather than be bled. The world has got to realise that taking advantage of shortages between one country and another is not the way to keep stability and is not a good augury for peace. “The British Government and Eeople are willing for all countries to ave the system they want, but not at the expense of endeavouring to fo”ce it on us. If I thought Socialism meant the destruction of human liberty and denying people the right to say and feel what they think, I would not be a supporter of it. “Anything stopping liberty of mind is disastrous. We have seen in Eastern Europe democracy, as we understand it, completely wiped out.” He had read Foreign Office reports about people in Eastern Europe who had been taken away and never heard of again. Some had been taken to slave camps “as bad as Hitler’s.”