PRESERVATION OF PEACE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 27388, 13 May 1950, Page 7

PRESERVATION OF PEACE

Renewed Efforts By Western Powers Necessary

BIG THREE MINISTERS’ VIEW New Zealand Press Association—Copyright Bee. 9 p.m. . LONDON, May 12. The British, American and French Foreign Ministers —Mr Ernest Bevin, Mr Dean Acheson, and M. Robert Schuman—who began their three-day conference in London yesterday, decided that the international situation called for renewed efforts by the Western Powers for the preservation of peace, says the diplomatic correspondent of The Times. The Ministers took the view that the Communist victory in China had altered the balance of power in Russia’s favour although that development, they considered, may have been offset to some extent by the steady survival of economic life and morale in Western Europe, and also by the loss to Russia of Yugoslavia. The Ministers considered that the Russians were at present in no mood to end the cold war on any terms tolerable to the nations of the West. It was more likely, they thought, that Communist expansion would be' pursued with greater vigour.

In a communique issued after their first day’s talk, the Ministers called for a renewal, of the effort in all fields of preserving peace, “ particularly in building up an effective defence.” The Big Three said the development of defence must be accompanied by the strengthening of the economic foundation of the Western Powers to support the efforts for the protection of the free countries of the world. None of the three Western High Commissioners for Germany, all of whom are in London, was at Lancaster House when the talks opened. After the morning session Mr Bevin entertained the American and French delegations to lunch at his private residence. British political Opposition leaders were among the guests. Observers considered this a Government move to give British foreign policy a bi-partisan flavour. , Japanese Peace Treaty

The diplomatic correspondent of the New York Times in a despatch from Washington says that Mr Acheson had hoped to make substantial progress at the London meeting toward arranging a Japanese peace treaty, but it now appeared that this would not be even a major topic of conversation. The reason, says the correspondent, was that Mr Acheson did not have the approval of the Joint Chiefs of Staff or President Truman on Japanese peace treaty policy. The State Department and General MacArthur are in general agreement on the advisability of negotiating a peace treaty soon but the joint chiefs disagree. The joint chiefs are of the opinion that the greatest deterrent to Soviet aggression in Europe and the Middle East is the realisation that the Soviet would have to fight a two-front war in Europe and Asia, and as long as Japan is protected by United States troops, Soviet Communism cannot dominate the Far East. Furthermore, if the Western Powers make a separate treaty with Japan, the Soviet will still be legally at war with Japan and can exert great pressure on a weak Japanese Government to break up any alliance the Japanese may negotiate with the Western nations.

The State Department, on the other hand, believes that a reliable association between Japan and the Western Powers can be negotiated only by restoring a large measure of independence to the Japanese Government through a peace treaty. The State Department’s own reports and General MacArthur’s reports indicated that United States occupation is becoming increasingly unpopular with the Japanese, and there is a danger that United States prestigq and authority will continue to deteriorate as time passes and may reach the point where the Japanese will not agree to any , treaty in which the Western Powers retain security bases in Japanese islands. The State Department feels that a secure base in Japan over, a lohg period can be obtained only with the approval and support of the Japanese, and therefore the department favours a peace treaty as soon as possible.