WORLD POLICE FORCE

Timaru Herald, Volume CLVI, Issue 22992, 8 September 1944, Page 5

WORLD POLICE FORCE

U.S. Opposition Heated Debate In The Senate By Telegraph—N.Z. Press Assn. —Copyright NEW YORK, Sept. 6. The United States Under-Secretary of State (Mr Edward Stettinius) disclosed that the discussions at the Dumbarton Oaks conference have so far not altered American opposition to the idea of an international police force, nox- has the American delegation been won over to the more limited Russian proposal to create an international ah' constabulary. The Washington correspondent of the New York “Herald-Tribune” states that this disclosure came after a heated debate in the Senate in which the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee (Senator Tom Connally) protested against France’s admission to the present consultations, and Senator H. J. Bushfield (Republican) denounced the proposed world peace organisation under which the council would be authorised to invoke the use of an American military force without obtaining Congressional approval, thus making the President the absolute despot of the American people and indeed a true dictator.

Replying to this, Senator Connally submitted a long list of historical incidents in which Democratic and. Republican presidents had dispatched troops to foreign soil without Congressional consent. He added: “This principle is not a declaration of war. It is a declaration of peace.” France’s Admission Opposed Elaborating his opposition to France’s admission, Mr Connally said: “France played the part of a little country in this war, offering a very sorry spectacle when its army of 5,000,000 collapsed like a house of cards before the marching Nazis. She should prove her ability to sit in the council. She may later be elected to it by other nations, but first she should serve her apprenticeship.” Senator A. H. Vandenberg defended the proposed peace organisation. “We shall govern our delegates on any council,” he said, “and it is nobody’s business but ours how we will order our voice to be used when the question of the use of force arises.” The Washington correspondent of the “New York Times” ironically calls today’s session of the Senate as strikingly reminiscent of another “great debate” on America’s participation in the League of Nations 25 years ago which likewise started with acrimonious charges that the President was planning to throw away American sovereignty;