The U.S. and the War—An English View

Lake Wakatip Mail, Issue 4452, 30 January 1940, Page 3 (Supplement)

The U.S. and the War— An English View

by Harold Nicholson

Member of Parliament, ex-diplomat, author of “Dwight Morrow,” etc.

HAVE been interested in i the trend of letters I have received from correspondents in the United States since the outbreak of war. The earlier letters, written under emotion aroused by the Prime Minister’s broadcast of September 3rd, were resonant with admiration. Later my correspondents recovered from their initial rapture and realised the magnitude of the task which lies before us. There was a slight obituary ring about these letters and a depth of condolence which struck me as kindly but depressing. More recent letters have become puzzled and critical. In them echoed two questions with which we are becoming increasingly familiar. “What is England doing?” “Is this a real war or a sham war?”

But it is even more irritating to Americans if we tell them what America ought to do. There are persons in this country who cherish the theory that the United States ought to intervene in this war upon our side. Such wishful assumptions and blind impertinence on our part do far more harm than any propaganda which might be issued by the German-Ameri-can Bund. Why should we lower' our dignity by squealing for help before we have been hit? Let us fight our own great battle with dignity, with courage and silence. Let us leave it to the American people to make their own decision, when the moment comes, and in what ever way best suits their interests. We should, therefore, not attempt to persuade the American public, but there is no reason why we should not inform them of our purposes in this war. The American people are, I think, satisfied regarding our reasons for entering it. They have little doubt that we declared war because civilised life had become impossible under this constant menace of violent and progressive agression. But the}*- are not satisfied regarding our aims. It is something to assure them that we are fighting to destroy Hitlerism, but it is not nearly enough. Although it would be impossible at this stage to publish a detailed statement of war-aims—-of what we mean to do —we can certainly announce what we do not mean to do. We should proclaim immediately that we seek no annexation and no punitive indemnities. We desire neither the territory of Germany nor her economic ruin. This country, when the time comes, will be prepared to make great sacrifices for a stable peace—sacrifices of sovereignty, of power, of resources. From this war there must emerge some form of world federation, a new worldorder as yet undreamed of. It is folly to urge the Americans to join us in waging war; it is not folly to invite them to co-operate in thinking about the eventual peace.

It is irritating, of course, to be asked such questions by people living 3,000 miles away from the danger zone. Yet the duty of those of us who like America is to banish irritation and to increase understanding. We must realise that the American public have adopted an emotional attitude toward this struggle of liberty against violence. For them the issue is a single issue between law and anarchy, between right and wrong. They do not understand why we, who proclaim ourselves the champions of freedom, should have made so many compromises with its opposites. For them Manchukuo, Abyssinia, Spain and Munich were sinister diplomatic bargains with the powers of evil. Even to-day they doubt whether St. George really wants to slay a dragon to whom he has given so many cakes.

How are we to convince the American public of our true aims ? It must be remembered that Americans are morbidly sensitive to anything in the nature of foreign propaganda, and that they have during the past 20 years been assured that it was British propaganda alone which dragged America into the First German War. Books have been written and institutions founded for the sole purpose of warning the citizens of the Great Republic against the spider web of intrigue in which Great Britain hopes to ensnare them.

We smile at such fantasies, thinking them too foolish to deserve serious consideration. Americans themselves are under no such misapprehension. They know that while nobody can fool all the American people all the time, anybody can fool an enormous number of them for sufficient time to cause grave damage. It is for this reason that even the wisest among them are terrified of propaganda.

I share their alarm. I feel that the best form of British propaganda in the United States is to have no propaganda at all. Let us place at the disposal of American correspondents in London and the Empire all possible facilities. Let them tell their public the facts in their own language. It is better to risk their indescretion than to incur their suspicion; it is far better to tell them too much than too little. In spite of errors and muddles, the facts of the case are overwhelmingly on our side; let us give America the naked facts.

There is more that we can do: we can each of us refrain from saying foolish things. It may be irritating for us, engaged as we are in a most anxious and immediate struggle, to receive kindly advice from across the Atlantic.