Attlee Says That There Will Be No "Appeasement"

Wanganui Chronicle, 8 December 1950, Page 5

Attlee Says That There Will Be No "Appeasement"

Britain Will Stand In With U.S.A.

WASHINGTON, Dec. 6.—“ There has been some talk of what is called appeasement—a word of ill-omen,” said the Prime Minister of Britain (Mr. Attlee), in a major address on foreign policy given to a packed meeting of the National Press Club. “We have not come here for appeasement. We know from bitter experience that appeasement never pays,” he said.

Mr. Attlee gave the address between two sessions of his third conference with the President of the United States (Mr. Truman). Mr. Attlee said that with the grave military position in Korea the present was no time for criticism. He declared that it is Britain’s intention to stand side by side with the United States. MACARTHUR’S ACHIEVEMENT. Describing as a ‘notable achievement” what General MacArthur had done in Korea, Mr Attlee said: “The fact that faced with overwhelming odds the United Nations forces are now in difficulties should not obscure what was done under General MacArthur’s skilful and resolute leadership. You may be certain that in fair or foul weather where the Stars and Stripes fly in Korea the British flag will fly beside them. We stand by our duty and we stand by our friends.

“Times are critical and it would be idle to deny that the forces of United Nations have suffered a serious setback. This is not the time for criti-. cism. We must seek to find how best to help those who are bearing the burden.”

Mr Attlee did not give a report of his talks with President Truman because the talks were in progress. He said, however, that although there were bound to be differences of emphasis between Britain and the United States, the talks were “already enabling us to understand each other’s point of view.”

Mr. Attlee said: “There has been some talk of what is called appeasement—a word of ill-omen. We have not come here for appeasement. We know from bitter experience that appeasement never pays.

Stating that during the last war Britain and the United States had one great common objective of victory, Mr Attlee declared: “Since the war the United States and Britain have striven for one aim—the preservation of peace and the promotion of freedom and prosperity throughout the world.”

Declaring there was never a time when co-operation between Britain and the United States was closer or more friendly, Mr Attlee said of, fiis talks with President Truman: “I wanted to have with the President the broadest possible survey of world affairs and the frankest interchange of views. The objectives of our two countries are the same but it is evident that with our different geographical positions and different responsi. bilities there should be some differences of emphasis.” UNDERSTANDINGS. Saying that the talks enabled an understanding of each other’s viewpoint, Mr Attlee said: “That is the first and most necessary step in the forming of a common policy, for the ends we seek are not in dispute—they are not in doubt.” Mr Attlee said everyone had to recognise that the overall situation had deteriorated in the last few days.

“It is our task here to review the world situation and consider carefully our further course of action.

“We must always beware of taking short views dicta'cd by emotion. We must always recall that military objectives are a means to an end, not ends in themselves.” . . .

Mr Attlee said the purpose of the military operations by United Nations was to halt aggression and establish lasting conditions of peace.

Mr Attlee said Britain had a long association with the peoples of Asia and was vitally .concerned with the “great land mass of Asia.” Turning to Britain's recognition of the Communist Chinese as the lawfu? Government of China, Mr Attlee said: “We are asked how we can have diplomatic relations with the Government of China when its policies have clashed United Nations’ objectives in Korea. My answer is quite straightforward. The Chinese People’s Government has control of all Ihe mainland territory of China. They command the obedience of 400 million Chinese. These are stuborn facts. It is no good shutting one’s eyes to them. How can we refuse to recognise these facts? Arc we to cut off contact with one-sixth of the inhabitants of the world? Our recognition of the Chinese People’s Government was the recognition of obvious facts.”

Mr Attlee then dealt with the British Comonwc ill h's economic assistance plan for South-east Asia. He said the subsidiary title for the plan, “new horizons in the East,” expressed the hope which all members of the

Commonwealth had in the plan. He said it was necessary not only to have a political and military policy for the area; there must also be an economic and social policy. “Our aim is to try to get rid of those terrible extremes of poverty in that part of the world. All kinds of dangerous movements grow from this poverty.” Mr Attlee said the meeting of Commonwealth Prime Ministers in January would be particularly valuable because of his refreshing talks with Mr. Truman.

THREE IMPORTANT LINKS.

He said that there were three links on which Britain rested—one link with the United States, one with the Commonweal h and one with the rest of the world, especially Europe.

Two wcrld wars had shown how strong these links could be and how closely the defence of freedom and democracy depended on strong action between the United States and the United Kingdom.

Mr. Attlee said the democracies forces in Europe were growing in size “to defend the Atlantic community if anyone wished to attack it.” He declared: “I am confident that those who have pledged themselves to defend freedom will do so successfully.” Stating that Britain and the United States drew their inspiration from the same spiritual sources, Mr Attlee concluded: “I am certain that our talks here will make for full understanding and increased co-operation in the great causes that we all have at heart.”

Republicans Talk Of

Dismissing Acheson

WASHINGTON, Dec. 6 (Reed. 8 pm).—Senate Republican policy-mak-ers are considering whether to recommend formally the dismissal of the Secretary of State (Mr Acheson), Senator Robert Tall (Republican, Ohio) disclosed today. This was the first notice that, the Republicans were discussing concerted action against Mr Acheson, though several have individually demanded his resignation. There were signs that the demand to oust Mr Acheson might become a Republican condition for bipartisan unity in the current critls. How Wide Should Any Discussions With China Be? NEW YORK, Dec. 7 (Reed. 12.10 am). -Mr Attlep and President Truman have tidied up all their major immediate problems except two, i which have been referred to the British Cabinet for study, says the New York “Times” diplomatic correspondent. The problems are whether to keep any negotiations with Peking to the limited question of Chinese aggression in Korea, or whether to discuss a wider range of problems, including Formosa’s future, Communist China's representation in the United Nations and recognition of Peking as China's legitimate Government. The correspondent says the United States favours the first course, while Britain is inclined towards wider discussions.