The Press SATURDAY, OCTOBER 1, 1960. Still Voice Of Reason

Press, Volume XCIX, Issue 29324, 1 October 1960, Page 12

The Press SATURDAY, OCTOBER 1, 1960. Still Voice Of Reason

,_„Mr Macmillan’s speech to the United Nations General Assembly was probably distinguished as much by the manner of its delivery as by its content. His peculiarly English intellectual detachment, calm, and dignity must have done much towards cooling a superheated debate. After his early reluctance, Mr Macmillan went to New York primarily because the march of events called for ' a strengthening of the United Nations against the attacks of Mr Khrushchev’s group. The greatest importance of Mr Macmillan’s mission, however, is that he may be able to/discover fresh ground for "a renewal of peaceful negotiations between East and West. By assailing the Secretary-General (Mr Hammarskjold) as “a lackey of “ imperialism ”, Mr Khrushchev injected a new factor into the Congo affair; by proposing a three-member secretariat in Mr Hammarskjold’s stead, he revealed a resolve to frustrate the United Nations’ programme to exclude the cold war from Africa. His manoeuvres created circumstances in which the _ United States was forced to 'yield the diplomatic initiative to Britain. Russian insolence after the summit fiasco was directed mainly against the Eisenhower Administration. Mr Khrushchev’s effrontery in travelling uninvited to the United States for the General Assembly scarcely established a claim to friendly greetings from President Eisenhower. At this perplexing, time President de Gaulle chose to remain aloof; and the mantle of negotiator with Mr Khrushchev fell upon Mr Macmillan. Already, in .reports of Mr Macmillan’s first UJ , private conversation with Mr “'"Khrushchev, the world may find a little encouragement, for

thinking thatpeace may yet be secured.

Britain’s proposals to the United Nations on Thursday were on a much narrower front" than those of the United States a week earlier. For that reason they may stand a better chance of consideration.' With characteristic high-npindedness, President Eisenhower had called for a broad expansion of the United Nations’ responsibilities in Africa, Latin America, Asia, and the Middle East. In addition to supervising terrestrial" .disarmament, said the President, the United Nations should become a ■clearing-house in which satellite bodies would be verified before launching. Next in the great debate came Mr Khrushchev's blustering and inconsistent tirade against the United Nations’ present organisation, against colonialism and all the allied bogies, and against the Western Powers’ alleged unreadiness to disarm. Mr Macmillan’s reply showed him alert to any prospect of damping down the explosive sitoation. He emphasised the urgency of

preserving the United Nations, brought attention back to disarmament, and suggested a logical way of preparing for it. Without evading fundamental issues he sought to restore point, realism, and hope to a discussion which, unchecked, could have ended only in confusion, and might have ended in catastrophe. Mr Macmillan, secure in the knowledge of His

Government’s Parliamentary majority, could speak to much better practical effect than a President jiearing the end of his term. Mr .Macmillan’s speech, though far from the most dramatic, may be the most useful of the fifteenth General Assembly.