Imagini ale paginilor


In Asia and the Pacific, the pending Manila Pact supplements our treaties with Australia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Korea and Japan 5 and our prospective treaty with the Republic of China. These pacts stand as solemn warning that future military aggression and subversion against the free nations of Asia will meet united response. The Pacific Charter,' also adopted at Manila, is a milestone in the development of human freedom and self-government in the Pacific


Under the auspices of the United Nations, there is promise of progress in our country's plan for the peaceful use of atomic energy.8

Finally, today the world is at peace. It is, to be sure, an insecure peace. Yet all humanity finds hope in the simple fact that for an appreciable time there has been no active battlefield on earth. This same fact inspires us to work all the more effectively with other nations for the well-being, the freedom, the dignity, of every human on earth. In the ultimate achievement of this great purpose lies the only sure promise of security and permanent peace for any nation, including

our own.

These developments are heartening. But sobering problems remain. The massive military machines and ambitions of the Soviet-Communist bloc still create uneasiness in the world. All of us are aware of the continuing reliance of the Soviet Communists on military force, of the power of their weapons, of their present resistance to realistic armament limitation, and of their continuing effort to dominate or intimidate free nations on their periphery. Their steadily growing power includes an increasing strength in nuclear weapons. This power, combined with the proclaimed intentions of the Communist leaders to communize the world, is the threat confronting us today.

To protect our nations and our peoples from the catastrophe of a nuclear holocaust, free nations must maintain countervailing military power to persuade the Communists of the futility of seeking to advance their ends through aggression. If Communist rulers understand that America's response to aggression will be swift and decisive-that never shall we buy peace at the expense of honor or faith-they will be powerfully deterred from launching a military venture engulfing their own peoples and many others in disaster. Now this, of course, is a form of world stalemate. But in this stalemate each of us-every American-may and must exercise his high duty to strive in every honorable way for enduring peace.

The military threat is but one menace to our freedom and security. We must not only deter aggression; we must also frustrate the effort of Communists to gain their goals by subversion. To this end, free. nations must maintain and reinforce their cohesion, their internal

1 Infra, pp. 912-916.
2 Infra, pp. 878-880.
2 Infra, pp. 873-875.
Infra, pp. 897-898.
Infra, pp. 885-886.
Infra, pp. 945–947.
7 Infra, p. 916–917.
See infra, pp. 2805-2823.


security, their political and economic vitality, and their faith in freedom.

In such a world, America's course is clear:

We must strengthen the collective defense under the United Nations Charter and gird ourselves with sufficient military strength and productive capacity to discourage resort to war and protect our Nation's vital interests.

We must continue to support and strengthen the United Nations. At this moment, by vote of the United Nations General Assembly,' its Secretary General is in Communist China on a mission of deepest concern to all Americans: seeking the release of our never-to-be-forgotten American aviators and all other United Nations prisoners wrongfully detained by the Communist regime.2

We must also encourage the efforts being made in the United Nations to limit armaments and to harness the atom to peaceful use.3

We must expand international trade and investment and assist friendly nations whose own best efforts are still insufficient to provide the strength essential to the security of the free world.

We must be willing to use the processes of negotiation whenever they will advance the cause of just and secure peace.

In respect to all these matters, we must, through a vigorous information program, keep the peoples of the world truthfully advised of our actions and purposes. This problem has been attacked with new vigor during the past months. I urge that the Congress give its earnest attention to the great advantages that can accrue to our country through the successful and expanded operations of this information program.

We must carry forward our educational exchange program.

Now, to advance these many efforts, the Congress must act in this session on appropriations, legislation, and treaties. Today I shall mention especially our foreign economic and military programs.

The recent economic progress in many free nations has been heartening. The productivity of labor and the production of goods and services are increasing in ever-widening areas. There is a growing will to improve the living standards of all men. This progress is important to all our people. It promises us allies who are strong and self-reliant; it promises a growing world market for the products of our mines, our factories, our farms.

But only through steady effort can we continue this progress. Barriers still impede trade and the flow of capital needed to develop each nation's human and material resources. Wise reduction of these barriers is a long-term objective of our foreign economic policy-a policy of an evolutionary and selective nature, assuring broad benefits to our own and to other peoples.

We must gradually reduce certain tariff obstacles to trade. These actions should, of course, be accompanied by a similar lowering of

1 See General Assembly Res. 906 (IX), adopted Dec. 10, 1954; infra, pp. 27112712.

2 See infra, pp. 2707-2712.

See infra, pp. 2805-2824.

See Title IV of PL 133, approved July 7, 1955 (69 Stat. 277-279).

trade barriers by other nations, so that we may move steadily together toward economic advantage for all. We must further simplify our customs procedures. We must facilitate the flow of capital and continue technical assistance, both directly and through the United Nations. This must go to less developed countries to strengthen their independence and raise their living standards. Many another step must be taken in the free world to release forces of private initiative.1

Our many efforts to build a better world include the maintenance of our military strength. This is a vast undertaking. Over 4 million Americans servicemen and civilians-are on the rolls of the Defense Establishment. During the past 2 years, by attacking duplication and overstaffing, by improved procurement and inventory controls, by concentrating on the essentials, many billions of dollars have been saved on these defense activities. I should like to mention certain fundamentals underlying this vast program.

First, I repeat that a realistic limitation of armaments and an enduring, just peace remain our national goals; we maintain powerful military forces because there is no present alternative-they are forces designed for deterrent and defensive purposes, able instantly to strike back with destructive power in response to any attack.

Second, we must stay alert to the fact that undue reliance on one weapon or preparation for only one kind of warfare simply invites an enemy to resort to another. We must, therefore, keep in our Armed Forces balance and flexibility adequate to our needs.


Third, to keep our Armed Forces abreast of the advances of science, our military planning must be flexible enough to utilize the new weapons and techniques which flow ever more speedily from our research and development programs. The forthcoming military budget therefore emphasizes modern airpower in the Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps and increases the emphasis on new weapons, especially those of rapid and destructive striking power.

It seeks continuous modernization of our Army. It accelerates the continental defense program and the buildup of military reserve forces. It continues a vigorous program of stockpiling strategic materials and strengthening our mobilization base. It provides for reduction of forces in certain categories and their expansion in others, to fit them to the military realities of our time. These emphases in our defense planning have been made at my personal direction after long and thoughtful-even prayerful-study. In my judgment, they will give our Nation a defense accurately adjusted to the national need.

Fourth, pending a world agreement on armament limitation, we must continue to expand our supplies of nuclear weapons for our land, naval, and air forces. We shall continue our encouraging progress, at the same time, in the peaceful use of atomic power.

Fifth, in the administration of these costly programs, we demand.

1 For specific recommendations made in the area of foreign economic policy, see infra, pp. 2948-2953.

2 H. Doc. No. 16, 84th Cong., 1st sess., Jan. 17, 1955.

the utmost efficiency. We must assure our people not only of adequate protection but also of a defense that can and will be resolutely carried forward from year to year until the threat of aggression has disappeared.

At this time the executive and legislative branches are under the management of different political parties. This fact places both parties on trial before the American people.

In less perilous days of the past, division of governmental responsibility among our great parties has at times produced indecision approaching futility. We must not let this happen in our time. We must avoid a paralysis of the will for peace and international security.

Now in the traditionally bipartisan areas-military security and foreign relations-I can report to you that I have already, with the present leaders of this Congress, exchanged assurances of unreserved cooperation. Yet, the security of our country requires more than maintenance of military strength and success in foreign affairs; these vital matters are in turn dependent upon concerted and vigorous action in a number of supporting programs.

I say, therefore, to the 84th Congress:

In all areas basic to the strength of America, there will be-to the extent I can insure them-cooperative, constructive relations between the executive and legislative branches of this Government. Let the general good be our yardstick on every great issue of our time. In that pledge I should include, also, the similar pledge of every head of department or independent agency in this Government.

23. PRINCIPLES IN FOREIGN POLICY: Address by the Secretary of State, April 11, 1955 1


This is a gathering of learned persons. It is an occasion when it may be permissible to talk in terms of general principles. That, I can assure you, is not a purely academic exercise. National action should always reflect principles. Therefore, those who have responsibility for action have also a responsibility to assure that what they do represents something more than immediate political expediency.

However, the guides to conduct are not always clear and simple. Often, indeed, they seem to conflict. Perhaps it will be of interest if I indicate some of the problems which confront those who try to find, in morality and in reason, a compass to direct their course.

Let me mention, as a first problem, that of peace vs. liberty. Peace is a goal which men have always sought. It is a goal which we particularly think of at this Easter season when we commemorate the resurrection of the Prince of Peace.

1 At the Fifth Annual All-Jesuit Alumni Dinner, Washington; Department of State Bulletin, Apr. 25, 1955, pp. 671-675.

It is difficult to exaggerate the horrors of war or the longing of humanity for peace. Wars used to be limited in their scope, and they were regulated so as to spare civilians from most of their dire consequences. I myself can think back to the days when private property was immune from seizure in time of war; when interruption of trade was limited to particular ports which were closely blockaded or to contraband of war, by which was meant the actual tools of war.

As a youth, I attended the second Hague Peace Conference of 1907, which drew up protocols designed to prevent the use in war of the new scientific developments of that time. It was, for example, sought to forbid the dropping of explosives from balloons.1

The First and Second World Wars showed that modern war is "total" war and that it is whole peoples, rather than the military, who suffer its cruel effects. Furthermore, we know that war more than ever involves compulsory enmity, outrages against the human personality, cruelty, vengefulness, and wanton distortions of the truth.

Today throughout the world there is a rising demand for protection against the misery, the agony of body and of spirit, the massive destruction of life and of property which modern war wreaks upon man. There is, however, another aspect of the matter. Peace can be a cover whereby evil men can perpetrate diabolical wrongs.

During recent years the Communist rulers, through their propaganda, have sought to capitalize on love of peace and horror of war as a means of extending their rule over all the human race. Through such propaganda efforts as the Stockholm "Peace" Appeal,2 they have tried to divert the peoples of the free world from necessary measures of defense and create throughout the free world a popular demand for peace at any price.

Crafty scheming underlies that planning. The Communist leaders know that, if pacifism becomes a prevalent mood among the free peoples, the Communists can easily conquer the world. Then they can confront the free peoples with successive choices between peace and surrender; and if peace is the absolute goal, then surrenders become inevitable.

In this connection we should remember that while modern developments have made war more terrible, they have also made the consequences of retreat and surrender more terrible. Modern war could now destroy much of the life on this planet. But also it may be possible that craven purchase of peace at the expense of principle can result in destroying much of the human spirit on this planet. Peace, under certain conditions, could lead to a degradation of the human race and to subjecting human beings to a form of mental decay which obliterates the capacity for moral and intellectual judgment.

We know, in individual cases, the effects of brainwashing. It leads men to repudiate their cherished beliefs and to accept as fact what, if they were sane, they would know to be false. Not infrequently those who have been brainwashed come sincerely to believe that they

1 See Declaration of Oct. 8, 1907; 33 Stat. 2439-2443.

2 Resolution adopted Mar. 19, 1950, by the Permanent Committee of the World Peace Congress meeting in Stockholm; Documents on International Affairs, 1949-1950 (London, 1953), p. 139.

« ÎnapoiContinuați »