NEGOTIATE WITH RUSSIA; NEVER USE THE H-BOMB

ELEANOR ROOSEVELT states her foreign policy.

I AM troubled, as are so many other people, by statements made in various responsible quarters which indicate that there is a growing feeling among United States officials that negotiation with the Communists is impossible and that, perhaps, the inevitable end to our present concentration on atomic military power is the use of these atomic weapons. I think I must say that, for me, the H-bomb has always been something no nation could ever use because the destruction created in any country, which would include the killing of hundreds of thousands of innocent people, would be too revolting to the human conscience.

I would not, therefore, cut down completely on other modern weapons which could be used in localized wars because, human nature being what it is, it will take a long time for people who have always turned to force to learn the ways of reason and peace. But in the United Nations we have the machinery for helping people in every corner of the globe to become educated.

I think we should turn to the question of how to accomplish our ends through methods which we can countenance, and which are not methods of force. I be lieve we are in a rut. We seem to have neglected the arts of diplomacy and negotiation. Let’s concentrate less on atomic power. Keep it in the background. Let’s not allow our ordinary military power to go down, but let’s concentrate as we have never concentrated before on the ways by which we can regain the friendship of statesmen and people who have been drifting away from us. And let’s negotiate with the Communists, with the assurance that we have more strength both economically and spiritually than they have, and more to offer to the peoples of the world.

KREMLIN SOON READY FOR ALL-OUT ATTACK

AIR FORCE ASSOCIATION, in a formal resolution signed by Generals Jimmy Doolittle, Ira Eaker and Carl Spaatz, among others, says the U.S. should think of A-bombs as conventional weapons and be ready to use them any time.

The Free World is fast approaching a JL time of total danger, when it is possible to destroy a nation’s capacity and will to retaliate. Only our ability and our announced willingness to take decisive action during the present period might still resolve the issue between world freedom and world slavery. Soon the Kremlin will be militarily ready to launch a large-scale surprise assault on the United States. Our current strength in air power and nuclear weapons, thus far the major deterrent to all-out war, has not been exploited in our reaction to continued local aggression.

We believe that our people and the peoples of the Free World are confused as to how our government plans to use air power for peace. We believe it likely that the Soviets have no clearer understanding of our policy and not understanding it, are therefore unlikely to be deterred by it. We believe that our national policy must clearly define nuclear weapons as legitimate and conventional instruments for resisting aggression, or the Free World’s temporary advantage in weapons technology will be seriously compromised.

SOME “LIBERALS” PROVE WORSE THAN McCARTHY

NEW YORK POST, most partisan Fair-Deal paper in the East, says the Democratic maneuver on the antisubversion bill was “a retreat without honor.”

IN a more rational time the revised [antisubversion] bill would be generally recognized as a monstrosity. But at least it avoids the Humphrey-Morse provision which would have set the stage for mass political roundups on a scale heretofore identified with Communist and Fascist states. For this comparative moderation the country is therefore indebted to such men as McCarthy and McCarran, who went along with Eisenhower in opposing the move to make mere membership in a Communist-action group a criminal offense.

What happened was an almost total failure of nerve among men who had heretofore resisted the know-nothing crusade. In the end it was impossible to tell the players without a scorecard; Senate liberals, headed by Humphrey, were leading the demagogic pack, trying to prove they had less respect for civil liberties than McCarthy himself.

What is most tragic about the literal surrender is that it occurred at a moment when know-nothingism was in retreat. Joe McCarthy had lost great ground in recent months. This could have been an autumn in which democratic liberalism reasserted its strength and self-confidence at the polls. That issue has been hopelessly muddled by men who used to proclaim their devotion to freedom. They have now won the right to boast in a public place that they engineered a more extreme, ill-considered and repressive statute than Joe McCarthy ever proposed.

FOR FREE TRADE BUT NOT EAST-WEST TRADE

CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR, whose editorials consistently support free world trade, draws an important line.

MR. Attlee’s Peking visit is providing new propaganda opportunities for world Communism. One concerns EastWest trade, toasted at [the] ceremonial dinner to the British Labor delegation. It has wide appeal in Britain and Western Europe. There is a fundamental difference of approach to trade, however, between totalitarian states and democracies. Totalitarian regimes subordinate trade to political ends. A recent illustration [is] the manner in which the Chinese Communist regime has dealt with British firms in China.

The Communists made business virtually impossible for these firms. Peking channeled orders through Communist trade agents direct to Britain. It included demands for strategic goods, the sale of which would cause Anglo-American friction. Obviously it isn’t just trade the Communists want, but trade on their own political terms and for political purposes.

NEITHER PARTY SURE OF NOVEMBER ELECTIONS

DORIS FLEESON, Fair-Dealish columnist whose pipelines into the Republican party are surpassed only by her Democratic sources, finds “election jitters” in both camps, despite brave public talk.

NEITHER Republicans nor Democrats are deeply confident that they will win the mid-term elections. It is said—on both sides—that for the first time in years the President will not be an issue, nor will a war, nor will some striking innovation in domestic policy. It is not surprising that Democrats talk in this vein. They want it to be so. The real surprise is that the Republicans are not more confident. Most of the big guns are on their side. On the basis of the political balance sheet the Republicans should be enormously cheerful. With a few exceptions, they aren’t.

Their assets are obvious: a popular President; most of the money, most of the newspapers, tax cuts and above all, no war and no depression. [The Democrats] are still on the defensive on the Communists-in-government issue, despite Senator McCarthy’s slippage. [But] the Democrats have some advantages. They have better candidates on the whole and a strong bloc of junior Senators. Their human qualities win them friends among “working stiffs” everywhere that many Republicans find hard to attract. They think the drop in farm prices will also help them.