THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES Tuesday, March 16, 1943. UNITY OF PURPOSE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 25175, 16 March 1943, Page 2

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES Tuesday, March 16, 1943. UNITY OF PURPOSE

A question asked in a Gallup poll in the United States some three or four months ago, “ Do you feel you have a clear idea of what the war is all about—that is, what we are fighting for? ” was answered in the negative by roughly a third of those who troubled to consider it. The Manchester Guardian, when it commented on this result, said that in Great Britain the proportion of bewilderment would have been a great deal less, the difference being that between “ a people who entered the war with deliberation and resolution and a people on whom it came without chance or choice.” The implications of that view are worth pondering. They go far to explain, for instance, why the present visit of Mr Anthony Eden to Washington is being described as possessing outstanding interest and importance. In the United States the question of war aims has been debated at length in recent months, not always without, acerbity. At one -stage the New York Times was constrained to point out that it threatened to become a challenge, which was being “flung primarily at the British; Empire as if it was not our ally but either our enemy or our vassal.” That was a strong reproof, indicating not merely that it was deserved, but that much remained to be dope to perfect the full measure of international co-operation which must be the chief aim of the United Nations. The Vice-Presi-dent of the United States, Mr Henry Wallace; put the question ,of‘ postwar aims in clear perspective—and, incidentally, raised it to a lofty level of idealism—when, in December, he declared his belief that the United States was willing to assume a responsibility proportionate to her strength: The aim [he said] would be to preserve the liberty, equality, security and unity of the United Nations —liberty in the political sense, equality of opportunity in international trade, security against war and business depression due to international causes, and unity of purpose in promoting the world’s general welfare.

Mr Wallace was, in effect, restating the major requirements of the Atlantic Charter. _ Mr Eden has, in his first explanation of the objects of his American visit, reaffirmed the determination of the British Government to continue fighting the war and to win the peace with the same objects in view. He was in America, he tolcl correspondents, for a general exchange of views on war issues, nothing being excluded. He emphasised that not only was collaboration between Britain, the United States, and Russia “pretty well indispensable” if a stable peace was to be ensured, but that it must be enlarged to include all the Allies. This is surely the essential prerequisite of post-war stability. The first task is to ‘crush the aggressor Powers beyond any possibility of their re-emergence in strength, singly or in coalition, .menacing, to the world’s peace. It is not a military task alone, although the emphasis for the moment is necessarily on the material and strategic problems with which the Allies are confronted. But there are political problems that run parallel with those that are, or may seem to be, purely military in scope. • Experience with the French in North Africa, and with Russia on the question of a second front in Europe, has shown how vital it is that distrust of motives should be avoided. The attainment of Anglo-American solidarity, not merely of official view but —perhaps more importantly—of public opinion, would be a long step forward toward the goal of postwar agreement on the major political and economic questions which will present themselves for solution. If, as the correspondent of the New York Times believes, one of Mr Eden’s chief objectives will be to arrange for an early conference of the United Nations to discuss the whole field of post-war collaboration, the importance of his visit would not seem to require further elaboration. American popular opinion is apparently ripe for education on the large duties and responsibilities that must be undertaken, jointly, by the Allies after the war. Mr Eden will perform an invaluable service if he can persuade the American nation that co-operation, not necessarily leadership, will be the aim of British diplomacy in the new world order, and that the effectiveness of that collaboration between the United Nations which it is hoped to see emerge will depend largely on the degree to which common purposes can be defined and accepted while the war is yet to be won.