Policy in the Making

A Big Three meeting was in the wind. When it would be held was up to Marshal Stalin. But last week both Winston Churchill and Harry Truman gave unmistakable evidence that they thought it should be soon.

To some, perhaps, there was still something incongruous in the idea of Harry Truman being one of the Big Three. No such feelings animated the Russian soldiers who prepared the platform for the U.S.-Soviet victory celebration in Germany (see cut). And to plain citizens everywhere, looking at a map of the world's trouble spots, the urgency of a Big Three meeting was abundantly apparent (see INTERNATIONAL).

Meanwhile, in Washington, Harry Truman methodically prepared himself for the big event. He discussed it earnestly with Britain's handsome Anthony Eden, who was hurrying back home from San Francisco. He had another conference with ex-Secretary Cordell Hull at the Bethesda Naval Hospital--the third and longest (50 minutes) since he became President. From Brigadier General Elliott Roosevelt (who accompanied his father to Teheran) and from Anna Roosevelt Boettiger (who went along to Yalta), he got yet another fill-in on the Roosevelt policies. He had daily telephone conversations with Secretary of State Stettinius at San Francisco, and daily White House chats with Under Secretary Joseph C. Grew.

Firm Steps. Up to now, Harry Truman had been content to follow his predecessor's policies, to emphasize that he stood for the same things as Mr. Roosevelt. Last week he stepped out to make some new policy on his own.

The first facet of this new policy related to colonial areas. For years, the U.S., remembering its own origins, has generally stood, sympathetically and vaguely, for the independence of all peoples. On the rare occasions when it had had to act, practice had not always followed precept. Last week in San Francisco, the U.S. Secretary of State announced that the U.S. now preferred, in discussing the ultimate disposition of colonies or areas under trusteeship, the word "self-government" to the word "independence." The U.S. thus sided with Great Britain and France, against Russia and China, who had wanted UNCIO to go on record as favoring independence.

There were other sparks flying to indicate what shape U.S. policy was gradually taking on the anvil of events. In Congress, a bill was introduced to give Puerto Rico--which has long demanded independence--the choice of three alternatives: independence, statehood or a new wrinkle, dominion status. And at a White House conference with Philippine President Sergio Osmena, an interested conferee was Secretary of the Navy James V. Forrestal, who has repeatedly said the U.S. must keep some of the Pacific bases which its Navy has won.

Digging In. As important as the statement on colonies was President Truman's action toward France. To the White House from San Francisco came youthful French Foreign Minister Georges Bidault and French Ambassador Henri Bonnet. After 30 minutes they left beaming.

The President had told them that the U.S. would:

P: Give up part of its occupation zone in Germany to France.

P: Give up some of its food to feed the French people.

P: Welcome a French fighting force in the Pacific war (the French have long been anxious to take part in the recovery of French Indo-China).

Furthermore, the President told his visitors that he would welcome a meeting with General Charles de Gaulle. (This week Foreign Minister Bidault announced that such a meeting would take place "soon.") In sum, these moves represented the most ardent U.S. overture made to France since the liberation. Said a formal White House statement: "A strong France represents a gain to the world."

The implications of this action by the new U.S. President could not be missed anywhere in the world--certainly not in Moscow. The great fear of Big Three disunity still haunted the chancelleries. Meanwhile, the U.S. was doing some political digging-in of its own in Europe.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.