hilities of broader functions for the
What, specifically, would be some
of the new duties of NATO? At preset it seems the foreign ministers read
Prepared speeches at their infrequent
"leetings, but have little opportunity
*° discuss and to hammer out solutions to problems that affect them all.
For instance, in recent months three
^ATO members — Britain, Greece,
an-d Turkey — have been involved in
;i tragic dispute over Cyprus', an ex-
Plosive situation in view of its position affecting the Middle East. Yet
J-yprus was not even discussed in the
last meeting. In the present set-up
there is no chance to discuss other
Problems of the Middle East, although
Europe depends upon millions and
Millions of barrels of Middle East oil.
The French attitude, under the new
leadership of M. Pineau, of accepting
"te Soviet smile campaign without
reserve and of showing an almost complete lack of interest in the proposed
Amnion market as a key element in
trengthening the Atlantic community
wUised sharp dismay and concern dur-
lnR this same meeting.
One of the greatest problems facing
Europe is the reunification of Oer-
!"'I||\. and NATO leaders feel it could
e of real help in an advisory capacity.
, The new NATO Council might also
?,l''P dispel neutralism in Western
-'Hnpc. now encouraged by Soviet
r°°p cuts and constant Red propaganda.
Since 1945, over 050 million people
10 Were non-self-governing have be-
"iiic eighteen independent and sov-
r''mi nations, and others are in the
!.'"<ess of becoming independent.
,. "ii problems arc great. A broader
VK) could help chart their future
'"'itical. economic, and military
'"use where it affects the present
>l() community. The present
. m() recognizes its need for and
'<-'k of support by all national leader-
"l)s- The Dulles plan seeks to over-
; '""' flu's 1>\ providing for longer,
re Frequent, and better-prepared
I'.''''lings with the foreign ministers;
?8ger stalls lor the national delega-
ns and more information from their
r^t'i'iinicnls; and authority to discuss
'"'"'' subjects before a crisis breaks.
! ' ''at has been the response to this
JXv plan? It is too soon yet to know
* Complete reactions of the other
II"'"1'" i nations, but the response in
L* United Stales has ranged from
\,'lrtV acceptance to bitter rejection.
''">' who favor the general plan as
11 rs Fori m \i vvs. August, 7956
outlined by Mr. Dulles are prepared
to go even beyond this very flexible
organization into a supra-national government.
What is the basis for these bitter
protests? Some point to the present
military weaknesses, saying that even
after such staggering amounts of
money have been poured into the
arming and maintenance of a common army, the commander of its
forces tells us that NATO is not quite
prepared to protect Europe. They
point out that equipment is becoming
obsolete almost as fast as it is being
supplied, and maintain atomic war-
Sen. William E. Jenner IR-lnd.l asks "How much
have the Communists gained in Asia because we
are allied with the European powers?"
fare has outmoded NATO's methods
These criticisms, together with the
apparent lessening of international
tension, contribute a great deal to the
feeling that it is time now for NATO
to retire, or at least stand still.
Senator William E. Jenner (R-Ind.)
summarized much of the opposition to
NATO in a recent speech before a
patriotic rally of For America when he
I have never believed in the concept of
regional defense. The Soviet forces are
disposed hy one grand strategy. Why
should we divide our forces? It is folly, I
have never believed the Soviet leaders
intended In attack Europe, They have won
most of Asia without large-scale war, They
do nol waul Iu take over a Western
Europe reduced to ruins by bombing. I
even question whether we have not lost
more, militarily, hy allying ourselves with
the colonial nations of Europe than we
gained by NATO's armed forces.
When five divisions of NATO troops
appear in French Africa, to fight against
Arabs who are asking for liberty, we lose
military strength from Morocco to Pakistan. How much have the Communists
gained in Asia, because we are allied with
the European colonial powers? For all the
billions we have spent on NATO, I see no
proof that we arc militarily stronger than
we were seven or eight years ago."
By far tbe most explosive issue involved, however, is the question of
just bow far this new expansion program vv ill go. Where will it stop? Opponents contend that this is merely
the opening wedge in a move that
would eventually lead to the development of a global government, causing
a surrender of our sovereignty.
Senator John W. Bricker (R-Ohio)
is a strong critic of the plan, calling it
an "exploration of the desirability of
junking the American Declaration of
Independence." He envisions the plan
as one in which "the United States
would become a vassal province in a
regional superstate evolving out of
Senator Jenner sees NATO's task as
being twofold: first, to plan a joint
strategy for defense of the West: and
second, to help manufacture the
"parts" of a world government, and to
condition the member nations quietly
to give up their familiar independence
and their unique political ideals.14
What the various candidates for
President believe about international
government and treaties which might
supercede the Hill of Rights lias become an election issue of major magnitude. Several of the presidential aspirants within both major parties have
expressed themselves as being for a
much closer cooperative effort of the
Atlantic community, even to the extent
of actual union — if not now, then at
some time in the foreseeable future.
Of hers are diametrically opposed to
what they call the "one world" concept of international relations.
The "Atlantic Union" plan, which is
supported by a number of U. S. senators: the "Federal Union" plan, with
widespread support abroad: the "United World Federalists'' plan — these
are becoming familiar terms in foreign
policy vocabulary. Candidates are having to make their views known.
This is only a bare outline of the
thinking that will go into the important decision which is at present in
the making: Should NATO expand
or expire? ENn
'■Jenner, from a speech in Carnegie Hall. Neu
V.uk. February 2?, 1956.
":" 'One World' - Election 1^"' '■" V. s. News
C- World Report. February 24, 1956, p. 82.
"Jenner, op. ctt.