Is Truman Doctrine Lulling Countries Into False Security? U.S. Protection

Wanganui Chronicle, 23 February 1949, Page 5

Is Truman Doctrine Lulling Countries Into False Security? U.S. Protection

NEW YORK. J’eb. 22 (Rec. li p.m.) There is deep contradiction between American stralegieal planning and American diplomatic planning for resistance against possible aggression and President Truman and American Chiefs of Staff have very different ideas on how such resistance should be organised, according to Waller Lippman, writing in 1 lie New York' “ I lerald-Ti'ihunc. ”

Lippimui says the lioyall iiici-1 dent emphasises lhe Imrdesl ami least clarified problem of American foreign policy. It is the lest of the policy of content ment, otherwise known as the Truman doctrine, which stales: “It must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities, or outside pressure.” Lippman says this doctrine, as understood by General MacArthur, the Japanese, Generalissimo Chiang Kai-

)shek, the Greek Government. West- 1 (‘in Germans, Western Berlin people, 1 Norway, the Netherlands, Belgium, I and France, is an American commit- i ment to defend them, to give them an automatic guarantee that an American force would be available on their frontiers to contain the Russians. Lippman adds: “That has never been [ lhe view of the American Chiefs of : > Staff. They have known it was an abr surdity to suppose that, an adequate i ’ local force could be developed on the ■ whole vast periphery of the Soviet . ■ Union in Europe, the Middle East, and p ■ Asia.” *i

i Lippman continues: “They have ' known always that a power like Rus- ' sia cannot, if it wishes to make war, be contained by local defences —it can only be held in check by the deterrent power of the overall force of

the United States. There has, 1 heirfoie, always been a deep contradiction between American strategical planning and diplomatic planning. “Mt’. Lange. Norwegian Foreign Minister, was right in coming to Washington to discover whether the United States would, and could, defend Norway against, invasion. This is also the issue between General MacArthur and Mr. Royal 1 (Secretary of the U.S. Army). It is not whether the United States will go to war if [Japan is attacked but whether in the [case of war Japan is to become another Bataan.”