• UNITED STATES
• GREAT BRITAIN
• THE NETHERLANDS
• FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF
Should It Expand or Expire?
The statement made recently by
Secretary of State John Foster
Dulles that the time has come
for NATO to advance from its initial
stage into the "totality of its meaning"
did not come as a surprise to those
who have watched the career of
NATO during the past seven years —
from whichever side of the fence. Yet
this announcement has set in motion
such a volume of comment, speeches,
interviews, and analyses as to goad
every thinking American into considering very seriously the purposes and
destiny of the North Atlantic Treaty
With relatively minor exceptions,
our mutual security program in
Europe, along with fourteen other nations who signed the North Atlantic
Treaty, has been entrusted to the organization implemented to carry out
the provisions of that treaty — NATO.
Now. with efforts being made to
broaden its primary emphasis of maintaining a military defense against a
common aggressor to include activity
in economic and political areas, man)
people are earnestly wondering about
both the "mutual" and "security"
phases of the program.
I las NATO been successful? Are our
defenses in the Atlantic area adequate
to meet major aggression? Has the
"new face" of the Russian collective
leadership actually reduced international tension, and thereby reduced
the need for a strong security program
in Europe? Is it fair and necessary for
the United States to pour such tremendous amounts of money and manpower — many times more than all the
other NATO nations put together —
into such a cooperative enterprise?
Does the proposed expansion program
mean world government, or a prelude
to it? These are some of the vital questions people are asking. Important decisions are in the making, to be announced in December of this year.
American citizens need to understand
the issues and have a voice in the
making of these decisions.
NATO has not arisen from a single
foundation, but rather from three: the
awareness of a common heritage, the
presence of a common danger, and a
common determination to resist it.
No one can deny the multiplicity of
spiritual, cultural, and personal ties
that link the North Atlantic peoples.
According to the 1950 census, there
were more than 3-3 million people living in the United States who either
were born abroad or had parents born
abroad. Of this number, nearly half
came from the fourteen other NATO
countries. Because of blood ties, v/e
have necessarily shared our culture*
traditions, educational concepts, reli'
gions, and basic political principle*
even though each nation has man1'
tained its own identity. The Atlanta
community apparently was a living
reality long before a treaty stated itt0
In the period following World W^
II the Soviet rulers made clear the"
determination not only to hold fast W
their Eurasian conquests and to exploit their resources and peoples >"
the aggrandizement of Soviet po\vef'
but they made equally clear their >n'
tention to continue the expansion °
Communist power into other areas.
Faced by the grave peril of a grfil
and menacing threat — the Russia
octopus — ten strategically locati''
European nations, together witli ''"
United States and Canada, signed J
mutual security pact in 1949 known :"
the North Atlantic Treaty. Those ten
European nations are France, &e
gium, Britain, Italy, Luxembourg. '
Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, v*
land, Portugal. Later two mon' '''
tions, Greece and Turkey, and M"1 ,
recently the federal Republic of We
Germany, signed the treaty. The do"
Facts Forum News, August,