The Great Wall

All around the globe, from Washington to Peking and back to Geneva, one great international question cast its shadow upon nearly every important diplomatic discussion: Should China's seat in the United Nations be turned over to the Communists?

Some nations, notably India, were clearly willing and anxious to get Red China into the U.N. Others, notably Great Britain, flirted with the hope that admission to the U.N. might somehow reform the Chinese Communists and usher in an era of "peaceful coexistence." Negotiating a defeat in Indo-China, France might be willing to let the Communists trade their way into the world organization. The U.S. harbors no such fears, hopes or illusions. In Washington last week, the key men in the U.S. Government were building a great wall to keep Red China from (as Warren Austin once put it "shooting its way into the United Nations."

Unalterably Opposed. At his press conference President Eisenhower recorded himself as unalterably opposed, under the present situation, to the admission of Red China. Can the United States possibly say this government should be admitted, asked the President, in view of the fact that Red China excoriated the U.N. at Geneva, that she is at war with the U.N., and that she has been declared an aggressor by the U.N.?

Secretary Dulles was just as emphatic. "The United Nations was not set up to be a reformatory," he told his press conference. "It was assumed that you would be good before you got in and not that being in would make you good." The U.S. takes the position, he said, that "the Communist regime is disqualified by its consistent record of opposition to the principles of the United Nations." On Capitol Hill the Senate Foreign Relations Committee added an amendment to the foreign aid bill: "Congress hereby reiterates its opposition to the seating in the United Nations of the Communist China regime as the representative of China."

Mission Accomplished. The man who had set off the worldwide discussion, Senate Majority Leader William Knowland, was well pleased with the result. Knowland had called for U.S. withdrawal from the U.N. if Red China is admitted. For that proposal to prejudge, Knowland received anything but unanimous approval.

It was clear that the White House and the State Department did not entirely agree with Knowland or with the Democrats' Senate Minority Leader Lyndon Johnson of Texas, who had said: "The American people will refuse to support the United Nations if Red China becomes a member" (TIME, July 12).

In the face of strong statements against prejudgment by Eisenhower and Dulles last week, neither Knowland nor Johnson reiterated his stand. Their critics said that they had retreated from what amounted to an open threat to the U.N. Their partisans replied that 1) they had not retreated, and 2) their sharp pronouncements had worked to nerve the Administration for the unequivocal position it took last week.

At week's end reports that Britain's Prime Minister Winston Churchill now favors delay in bringing up the question of U.N. membership for Red China (see FOREIGN NEWS) were circulated in official Washington. Previously, Churchill had warned U.S. officials that there probably would be a move for Communist China's entry this fall.

This week, as work on the great wall went forward. Dulles and U.N. Ambassador Henry Cabot Lodge were confident that it could be built and would not be breached (see below). But no responsible official of the U.S. thought that construction should be halted.

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