The Dominion FRIDAY, JUNE 2, 1944. TO AVERT ANOTHER WAR TRAGEDY

Dominion, Volume 37, Issue 210, 2 June 1944, Page 4

The Dominion FRIDAY, JUNE 2, 1944. TO AVERT ANOTHER WAR TRAGEDY

President Roosevelt and the United States Secretary of State, Mr. Cordell Hulll, have each made an interesting statement relating to post-war organization for international security. * Each has stressed the point that the policy of the United States in this connexion should be based on the unanimity of the American political parties. Io appreciate the importance of this requirement the limitations placed upon the President and his Executive by the American Constitution must be borne in mind. These were concisely summarized in i ecent editorial comment by the United States News when discussing the President’s meetings with Mr. Churchill and M. Stalin: “Mr. Roosevelt,” said this journal, “cannot commit the United States to policing Germany for five or ten years. He cannot promise that this country will guarantee security in Europe. He cannot say whether the United States will or will not cancel lend-lease debt. It is not within his power to promise big new loans to Europe. He cannot say that the United States surely will join a- world political organization. He cannot guarantee that United States markets will be opened wide to foreign goods in post-war; that trade barriers will come down.” It is with a realistic appreciation of these limitations —constitutional limitations—that President Roosevelt and Mr. Hull have approached the question of post-war international security. They have no doubt before them President Woodrow Wilson’s unhappy experience in connexion with the League of Nations Covenant after the last war.’ This the'United States Senate refused to ratify, with the result that the League was compelled to function without American representation—a fatal defect in its organization for world peace, as events proved. To alvert, if possible, a similar impasse after the present war, the President and Mr. Hull have been negotiating with the Senate for a unified policy. In April last, Mr. Hull revealed that the Senate had been asked to'form “a two-party group to give advice and help in organizing for the maintenance of peace, and aitangements have been made for consultation with the House of Representatives. The United States will thus be enabled to submit- to democratic processes of discussion with other nations a more concrete proposal.” And he added this warning: “Once before in our lifetime we fell into disunity and became ineffective in world affairs by reason of it. Should this happen again, it will be a, tragedy to you and your children, and to the world for generations. ’ Apparently the negotiations mentioned by Mr. Hull have enabled the question of United States participation in world security measures to. be carried a stage further. A dispatch from Washington quotes the President in an announcement to a Press conference that the blueprint for a post-war organization for world security is in its first draft stage.” ’ The United States, fie added, aimed at an organization to work for the rest of the world “without taking away America s independence and. integrity in any shape, manner, or form. Mr. Hull has also given out a statement in greater detail. Announcing that he had just concluded the first phase of discussions with the Senate post-war advisory committee on foreign policy, he said that with the President’s approval he was “ready to proceed with informal discussions with Britain, Russia, and China, and then with the Governments of the other United Nations.” He did not discuss the nature of the proposed security organization, but it has been interred that what is in mind is a league of nations armed with overwhelming military force to keep the peace. It is clear, however, that much still remains to be achieved in the way,of complete’accord within the political framework of the American Constitution. Mr. Hull refers to impending’further discussions with the leaders of both parties in Congress, and others. „ “The door of non-partisanship, he adds, “will continue wide open.” It will be a notable achievement, and a tremendous encouragement to other nations,.to win.national unanimity in the. United States on broad principles of foreign policy. The difficulty hitherto experienced in America of accomplishing this, emphasizes the real importance of making national foreign policy strictly non-partisan. \\ hei c the course is set, and clear, there is less room for doubts and misunderstandings among nations, less opportunity for international mischiefmakers to exploit political party divisions for the purpose of engineeiing crises leading to war.