Washington At Most Buoyant Since 1945

Press, Volume CI, Issue 30015, 27 December 1962, Page 9

Washington At Most Buoyant Since 1945

(A'.Z. Press Association—Copyright)

NEW YORK, December 26.

Not since the end of World War II had Washington seen a merrier Christmas than in 1962, the “New York Times” chief Washington correspondent, James Reston, said today.

There was a buoyancy in the United States capital that had not existed since the beginning of the great struggle with the Communist world. And the main reason for the merry, noisy hi-jinks was Cuba, he said.

“Since Khrushchev took his missiles home, Washington has not only been praying for peace but feels that it has a little more rational justification for believing in peace. “The nightmare of nuclear war by miscalculation is less prevalent now than it was a year ago. The Soviet Union demonstrated in Cuba that it will try anything but risk nothing that endangers its own security. "The illusion that the United States would not fight for its vital interests teas challenged, if not removed, in Cuba. This is the main cause why everybody in Washington seems to feel that this is the season to be jolly,” Reston said. Cuba, however, was not the only reason for the new confidence. Part of the reason was the youth of the Kennedy Administration.

"They have more bounce than any crowd that has run the capital since the early days of the “New Deal.’ They are a restless, wandering social gang who love to talk

well into the night, and they have been on the prowl all week," he said. Nineteen sixty-two was a year of other challenges as well. The President was challenged not only by the Soviet Prime Minister (Mr Khrushchev) but by Governor Ross Barnett of Mississippi, by Roger Blough of the United Steel Corporation and by the rising industrial power of Western Europe and Japan. Somehow, all the big issues of the 17 years of the postwar period had come to a head in these last 12 months. Nation against nation. State power against Federal power, big business against big Government and big labour against big Government. All of the crises had centred on the White House against a young President just starting his first Administration, and the general feeling in Washington was that that he came out of them very well. Whether that now justified all the confidence and spirit of well being in Washington, however, remained to be seen, Reston said. There was a common denominator of all these triumphs: they were defensive.

The President was responding to the acts of others, rather than projecting Presidential power forward to implement policies of his own. “The question at the end of the year is whether this new confidence and prestige can be harnessed to new and

effective policies in the coming 12 months. The position on the home front is not as good as the President had hoped it would be when he took office. “He came to the White House as an innovator, talking about the need to step up the nation’s rate of growth, improve its education, rationalise its agriculture, wipe out unemployment, and get the nation’s balance of payments in manageable form. “In none of these fields, however, have his promises been redeemed. He may have held his own against a population that is rising at the rate of over 3,000.000 a year, but no more than that. The record abroad is admirable, but the record at home is a disappointment to many of his closest followers,” Reston said.