THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS TUESDAY, JANUARY 31, 1939 AMERICA AND THE WORLD

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXVI, Issue 23259, 31 January 1939, Page 8

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS TUESDAY, JANUARY 31, 1939 AMERICA AND THE WORLD

Indications that the United States Senate may assert its interest in American foreign policy are offered by the course of its Military Affairs Committee's inquiry into the sale of military aeroplanes to Franee. On the evidence it does not appear that anything improper has been done. The French Government has placed orders with private American makers, as the British Government did previously. Unfortunately the French deal appears to have been wrapped up in a good deal of secrecy and to have been facilitated by American official collaboration, thus arousing suspicions of hidden commitments or, at least, giving an opening for isolationists to suggest that such commitments exist. Thus the high priest of isolationism and strict neutrality, Senator Nye, does not hesitate to brand the aeroplane deal as constituting a military alliance with France. However ridiculous this may sound abroad, however far it is most unhappily removed from the truth, the accusation will receive a nervous hearing in American ears, schooled for 150 years to heed Washington's warning against European entanglements. Senator Nye knows his public. He knows that a majority of Americans are the descendants of those who left Europe to escape its endless disputes and wars, and that they desire most passionately not to be involved. By playing on those feelings he and some of his Senators may easily enlist sufficient public opinion to force Congress to set on foot a searching inquiry into American foreign policy. Nothing really material is likely to emerge, but the effect may be to cause the Executive to proceed more gingerly in its foreign relations, except it receives unmistakable evidence of the backing of public opinion. Another effect should be to remind the Western democracies once again, as they were sharply reminded in 1919, that the President cannot commit the United States without the consent of Congress. It is never wise to build without firm foundations.

I As the law stands at present, the President is bound to a particular course of action as soon as he recognises that a state of war exists. He is thereupon compelled to declare an embargo on arms or loans to the belligerents and can exercise no discretion. This Neutrality Act, of which Senator Nye was one of the chief sponsors, is intended to prevent American trade and finance becoming so interested in the fortunes of a particular belligerent as to involve the nation. Its defects in prejudicing American peacetime trade and in paralysing American diplomatic influence and initiative have been recognised, but attempts to amend the Act have so far failed. The American people cling to this insulator, imperfect though it be; they are not sure that they want their President to have a freer hand, although they are apprehensive of the Fascist menace and realise that it may become entrenched in the Western Hemisphere for lack of a vigorous check from Washington. The events that led up to the Munich settlement startled the American people, but, competent observers are agreed, strengthened their isolationist attitude. Heavy rearmament was certainly accepted as a sequel, its purpose being not intervention across either Atlantic or Pacific, but defence of the Americas and their integrity. This hope that America may somehow contrive to divorce herself from the affairs of the world she lives in continues to be widely cherished and accounts for the suspicions aroused by French orders for military aircraft. The business is good, but selfpreservation is the first law of life. By these contracts, America may be committed in advance to one side in Europe, the very position the Neutrality Act was designed to avoid once war began. If Senator Nye manages to impress this point on the American people, they can scarcely escape the conclusion that isolation cannot be complete except they vacate the field of international trado in peace as well as in war. Such a confrontation would be salutary. They would be brought to see that as an important member of human society they cannot avoid their responsibility. Meanwhile it would be idle to pretend that American public opinion has reached that point, and White House cannot proceed in advance of the sovereign people as represented by Congress. The European democracies cannot rely on American support, not even as a supply base in wartime. Commitments are still out of the question. The most that can be hoped is parallel action in defence of parallel interests, and it is a question whether such action will be material outside the Americas. The first .and only firm objective of American armament and related policies has been defined as "to build a wall around the Western Hemisphere—a wall against political penetration and influence," not against legitimate trading. That objective is already being seriously compromised by German. Japanese and Italian penetration in all the Western Hemisphere from Mexico down to Argentina and Chile. The United States , has to ask herself whether she can effectively counter this aggression by standing on the defensive. Is it easier to repulse an unwelcome visitor when he reaches your doorstep or to assist in con-* fining him to his own territory] The presence of Fascist influences in many American Republics is causing the United States furiously to think. European entanglements, and Far Eastern ones too, are crossing those oceans once thought wide enough for safety in isolation.