The New Role for NATO

"We are at a point in time when important events occurring in rapid succession change the scene. It seems that this second postwar decade upon which we have entered will mark a new phase in the struggle between the forces of despotism and the forces of freedom." So declared Secretary of State John Foster Dulles this week, as he proposed a major next step in Western foreign policy: the transformation of the 15-nation North Atlantic Treaty Organization from a defense pact into a pregnant next "phase" that could conceivably make it an instrument for the integration of the Western world.

Dulles laid down his proposal cautiously in a speech prepared for delivery to the members of the Associated Press meeting in Manhattan. But it was clear from the care with which he chose his words that he was tossing out an idea for a possible close economic association of NATO members, an idea that would be discussed in detail at a meeting of the NATO Council next month.

Changes in the Kremlin. As he led up to his principal point, Dulles defined the changes in Russia that made such a venture possible. He noted that the Russian leaders now talked of conciliation where once they threatened violence. "We take deep satisfaction from the fact that we can today see within Russia some signs of light which could mark the dawning . . . All of this is tremendously important. It is more than we dared hope for a few years ago . . .

"If we treat the prospect of success as being itself a present success, that could turn into an ultimate disaster." The fact of Communist tyranny still remains, e.g., the division of Germany, the feverish drive for nuclear weapons, the fomenting of trouble in the Middle East and Asia, and the "iron heel" on the captive countries of Eastern Europe. Then, turning the tables, he added: "We believe that the spirit which in the last decade has provided so many self-governing peoples with political independence ought also to operate peacefully to stimulate independence for those subject to the ruthless colonialism of Soviet Russia."

Unwanted Simplicity. With a swipe at his critics (see below), Dulles explained that it was a simple matter to design Western foreign policy in the days of high tension and fear. "When the issue is 'who dies and who lives,' all other issues seem unimportant. But we do not want simplicity at that price."

He then defined the outlines of the path he hopes the West will tread in the new situation: "The mission of the West is not completed. More independence needs to be perfected. More economic development needs to be planned and supported throughout the world. More sense of equality and human brotherhood needs to be developed . . . The North Atlantic Treaty already serves as an indispensable and vital instrument of the Atlantic community. But the time has, I believe, come to consider whether its organization does not need to be further developed if it is adequately to serve the needs of this and coming generations. If that be the common desire of the NATO member nations, the U.S. will join eagerly in exploring the possibilities which now beckon us forward." Only two days before Dulles' speech President Eisenhower had set the basic framework for the Secretary's proposal. The U.S., the President told the American Society of Newspaper Editors, will continue to maintain "a collective shield against aggression to allow the free peoples to seek their valued goals in safety." The U.S. would continue to be "a helpful and considerate partner," especially to the new nations of the East which "share in common with all free countries the basic and universal values that inspired our nation's founders." Harking back to the happenings on Concord's North Bridge, April 19, 1775, Dwight Eisenhower put the meaning and hope of the new program into a sentence: "One hundred and eighty-one years ago, our forefathers started a revolution that still goes on."

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