BOLD CHANGES IN CANADIAN POLICY: REACTION AWAITED

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXXVI, Issue 22882, 28 February 1949, Page 6

BOLD CHANGES IN CANADIAN POLICY: REACTION AWAITED

(By Charles Lynch, Reuters Correspondent in Ottawa.) The Canadian Prime Minister, Mr. Louis St. Laurent, is staking the life of his Government on his policy of all-out support for the Atlantic Pact. Advocacy, of the pact represents a revolution in Canadian foreign policy.

Mr. St. Laurent is betting that there has been an accompanying revolution in Canadian thought on foreign affairs and that his policies will be supported by a majority of Canadians when eleclion time comes, probably next October. In Difficult Position In his efforts to gauge Canadian public opinion on this matter, he is in a difficult position. Canadians are traditionally indifferent to international affairs in peace time. Their political thinking is inclined to revolve round questions which affect them in the pocketbook and, until now, foreign affairs have not come into this category. During the last four years, since Canada signed the United Nations’ charter in 1945, Canadian foreign policy has run considerably ahead of Canadian public opinion in most matters upon which Canada has taken any definite stand. Canada’s policy during this period has been made by a handful of men in the External Affairs Department with little reaction for or against from the public, and very little debate in Parliament. Now, for the first time in her history, Canada is preparing to sign a treaty which involves wide commitments to specific nations and, presumably, considerable expenditure. Mr. St. Laurent and his colleagues have been trying for months to warn the Canadian public of what is coming in an effort to avoid the possibility of a sudden shock, particularly in traditionally isolationist Quebec, when the terms of the pact are announced- In this, they have been handicapped to no small extent by the fact that at the start of the Atlantic Pact talks in Washington all the Governments concerned agreed that no information about the discussions would be made public until a decision was reached. No Public Outcry So Far So far, there has been no public outcry, but Mr. St. Laurent cannot be sure whether this is due to public apathy or whether it means that the nation approves the course so far taken. He believes the latter is the true picture. "If he is wrong,” a member of his Cabinet told me, “this Government will fall.” Canada, in endorsing the proposal for the Atlantic Pact is proposing to place herself in a position which she has avoided ever since the earliest days of her nationhood —that of being committed in advance to go to war if a European nation is attacked. Canada never has signed a mutual defence pact with anyone, not even with Britain or the United States. Since she became an entity in 1867, Canada has fought in all of Britain’s wars, but she has made it abundantly clear each time that she was going to war on her own volition and not because of a decision of Downing Street. If the Atlantic Pact is worded as Mr. St. Laurent wants it to be worded, she will sign away this right. In return, she is seeking two things. The first is, in fact, her main motive for advocating the Pact preservation of the peace The second arises principally from bitter experience in the Second World War. Canada wants a share in the control of policy when the risk of war is involved. She did not like the London-Washington-Moscow triumvirate during the war. and she does not want any London-Washington “axis” now. Share in Control of Policy In a speech last September, the present Secretary of State for External Affairs. Mr. Lester Pearson, said: “Such a sharing of risks, resources and obligations (as in the Atlantic Pact) must be accompanied by, and flow from, a share in the control of policy. “If obligations and resources are to be shared, it is obvious that some sort of constitutional machinery must be established under which each participating country will have a fair share in determining the policies of all which affect all. Otherwise, without their consent, the policy of one or two or three may increase the risks and, therefore, the obligations of all.” On this basis, Mr. St. Laurent and Mr. Pearson have been advocates of the Atlantic Pact since the first germ of the idea came to light more than a year ago. They are as anxious to sign the Atlantic Pact as they were reluctant to sign the Rio de Janeiro Hemisphere Defence Treaty in 1947. There

is some fear that the United States may insist upon the Atlantic Pact being fashioned on the Rio de Janeiro formula, with each State committed to help another State when attacked, but reserving the right to determine the timing and nature of such helpThe United States, it is felt here, might want such a “softened” version in order to be sure of getting the necessary two-thirds ratification in the Senate. Wants a “Hard” Treaty Canada while agreeing that no pact is of any value if it cannot pass the United States Senate, wants a “hard treaty on the Brussels pattern. Canadian observers of the United States scene feel sure that the new Senate is sufficiently “enlightened” to pass such an agreement. Discussions on these matters are going ahead behind closed doors. When the details of the pact finally emerge, the Canadian Government will do everything in its power to bring them home to Canadians. The Government is not worried about getting the pact ratified in Parliament, for the two major Opposition parties have already approved it in prinoiple. The task is to get it across to the people themselves, the people who pay the taxes and cast their votes.

Most Canadians are still looking forward to tax cuts in the 1949 Budget. They may be in for a rude shock. Military expansion already under way will cost a considerable amount of money and certainly Canada’s role under the Atlantic Pact will not give her any “free ride.” Even if it does not involve sending Canadian troops overseas in the near future, it is certain to see her in the role of an arsenal, turning out arms to help equip her own forces and those of Western Europe. None of Canada’s policy-makers here expects the United States to foot all the bills for Canada’s part in any such programme. A good deal of the load will certainly fall upon the Canadian taxpayer. Mr. St. Laurent hones to convince the taxpayer that he is getting a bargain.