Allies Of U.S. Confused By Two Voices On Quemoy

Press, Volume XCI, Issue 27626, 5 April 1955, Page 11

Allies Of U.S. Confused By Two Voices On Quemoy

[Specialty Written for the N.Z.P.A. by FRANK OLIVER]

WASHINGTON. April 2.

An acute observer of the American political scene once said that the trouble with America is that every man insists on being his own Foreign Minister. There is more than a grain of truth in that, and there is a good deal of virtue in it until that irresistible impulse reaches the higher brackets of the Government. Latest advocate of sounding off as you feel like it is Admiral Carney, Chief of Naval Operations, to be unhappily accurate. What is in question now Is not the content of his remarks, but their wisdom, and his wisdom has been questioned by no less a person than the head of the State. These things, perhaps, are hard to understand in’countries where the theory of cabinet responsibility is accepted and understood, and the service chiefs, by tradition, eschew all temptation to sound oft on international affairs until they resign their commands. In America it is otherwise. In particular, we had in recent months first Admiral Radford, and Admiral Carney expressing views diametrically opposed to those of tlie Administration, and both still have their lobs. These blasts do not ease the burden that rests night and day upon the Administration in dealing with tense foreign affairs and delicate foreign relations, but they are regarded as the inalienable right of all Americans, whether they be men in the street or men in high office, provided of course they are based in sincerity. and are not made just for the fun of rocking the boat. The President has made it clear that he deplored Admiral Carney’s remarks, but disciplinary action is the last thing anyone in the Administration seems to be thinking about. The storm that Admiral Carney's remarks generated has added some weight to Democratic charges, recently voiced in Congress, that the Republican Party contains within it another warmly deny. The word “party” assumes some form

of organisation or group deliberately seeking war. But, undeniably, there are a number of people in high as well as low positions who firmly believe that the only thing the Orientals understand is force, and it is time to exercise some as an object lesson. This again harks back to Americanism. Where the British traditionally sidle up to a big problem, view it quietly from all sides, and finally and as quietly decide on measures, Americans meeting such a problem instinctively call up a bulldozer and proceed to remove the obstruction by force end overnight

“Impatience a Characteristic” Impatience is an American characteristic and, of course, one that leads first to words, then action, unless and until heavy responsibility acts as a curb.

The’ Administration, obviously, is hoping that the Chinese attack on Matsu and Quemoy will not develop, that time works on the side of caution for Peking, and that the uncertainty of American action may have its effects in Peking’s councils. Mr Dulles is still juggling, and is still keeping all the balls in the air. Contradictory statements from many governmental sources normally able to speak with a d<9free of authority, have certainly confused the American people as they have certainly confused America’s allies, and as certainly have not confused Peking. The basic trouble is that Government circles and Congressional circles are split over whether or not to defend Quemoy and Matsu. It is two months since Congress, bv an overwhelming majority, passed the defend Formosa resolution, which gives the President full authority to do what he thinks fit. Having disarmed itself, Congress, or at least many of its members, is now busily trying to make up the President’s mind for him. The general impression is that in the last two months the Administration has moved slightly closer to the idea of defending Quemoy and Matsu, but the decision Is still the President's, and his decision is still his own secret Perhaps only Peking action can wrest it from him.