Messages from Britain

In his last major public utterance, Joseph Stalin predicted that the Western allies would go to war with each other rather than stand together against Communism. There is no evidence and little chance that Stalin's prediction will come true. But there is a danger that the U.S. and Britain may drift apart and reach a point where their alliance becomes less effective in peacetime because of their mutual distrust. U.S.-British relations have been on the downgrade for months. Last week they reached a new low as a result of speeches in Parliament by Sir Winston Churchill and Clement Attlee (see INTERNATIONAL).

Churchill suggested that the U.S. should give in to the Communists in the Korean truce negotiations. Attlee's attack was more bitter; he said that it was a question whether President Eisenhower was really in charge of U.S. policy, and observed that the U.S. Constitution was designed for an isolationist state.

The Washington Post, a good friend of Britain, said that Attlee's speech was reminiscent of "Big Bill" Thompson's promises to Chicago voters that he would "punch King George in the snoot." "Our 'snoot,' " said the Post, "is the American Constitution, and Mr. Attlee, exclaiming that this was the cause of it all, smote it right lustily."

"Withdraw & Be Damned!" Congressional reaction was less urbane. Joe McCarthy, wild-swinging as usual, had a field day with the man he called "Comrade Attlee." McCarthy's climax: "If [the British] are trying to blackmail us into accepting a Communist peace on the ground that if we do not they will withdraw, I say, 'Withdraw and be damned!' . . . And then . . . let us sink every accursed ship carrying materials to the enemy, and resulting in the death of American boys!"

California's Bill Knowland said: "We are now face to face with the problem that our chief ally has joined with certain other United Nations members in urging a Far Eastern Munich . . . Mr. Churchill and Mr. Attlee . . . in effect . . . have told us . . . that if we do not accept their advice . . . we must be prepared to go it alone. So be it!"

"Moral Obligation." Illinois' Paul Douglas, in one of the best speeches of his career, went straight to the "moral obligation" behind the U.S. refusal to give up Chinese prisoners who do not want to go back into Communist clutches. Said Douglas :"There can be, in my judgment, no further compromise on this issue . . .

I want the free world to stand together . . . in defense of freedom and in defense of the individual. We should not move together in acquiescence to tyranny." Other Senators joined Douglas in sup porting the U.S. position and at the same time minimizing the harm done by the transatlantic exchange of insults. The chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Wisconsin's Alexander Wiley, called for "the steadying force of patience with our allies." New Jersey's H. Alexander Smith said: "Let us be sure that the fighting words which naturally come to our lips when we think of Korea do not become weapons for Communist victory instead of our own." Kentucky's John Sherman Cooper said: "Words will pass . . . The real importance of the incident is that it shows . . . a gap between the two greatest allies in the world, and it demonstrates the necessity of closing that gap . . ."

Damage Done. President Eisenhower handled the issue with cool, good sense. He said that he would be willing to meet with Communist leaders, as Churchill demanded, provided 'that the Reds showed by deeds some evidence of good faith.

In essence, the U.S.-British alliance survived the week's squall of insults as it is capable of surviving much sterner trials. But the Churchill-Attlee attacks had hurt the U.N. position in the Korean truce talks and had damaged the whole anti-Communist position, especially in Asia. Millions of Asians are as ignorant of the U.S. as Clement Attlee, and as ready to believe that the U.S. has aggressive intentions in that area.

The damage was caused in part by the U.S. failure to take seriously years of anti-American propaganda by British journalists and intellectuals. Britain's doctrinaire Socialists, especially, did their work well. London's New Statesman and Nation, the leading organ of dogmatic leftism, had lived to see the day when it could cheer a major postwar speech by Winston Churchill.

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