HOW CAN A NATION BE SECURE?
Part 3 of the pamphlet, "OUR FOREIGN POLICY 1952":
HOW CAN A NATION BE SECURE?
THE policy of the United States is to strengthen our own security by cooperating with other free nations to protect each one against aggression. By standing by others, we get them to stand by us. This is the policy of "collective security." It has led to the formation of the United Nations and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and to regional agreements in the two Americas and in the Pacific.
There are other ways to look for security, and the word has been misused as an excuse for shocking crimes of aggression. Hitler annexed Austria and Czechoslo-vakia and invaded Poland on the excuse that he needed these territories to protect Germany's so-called "security." In ancient times, a tribe might gain security by conquering its neighbors ; but the world of today will not tolerate such methods. Hitler did not make Germany secure. Japan did not win security by conquering vast areas of Asia. Instead, these nations aroused a world combination of forces that overwhelmed them both.
15
The free nations, threatened by the expansion of Germany and Japan, were slow to unite for their common defense. In the end they had to save their lives by beating the aggressors in a world war –– a war that badly damaged large parts of Europe and Asia.
Although the victory of the allies freed us from the military threat of the Axis, it has not been enough to give us security. The destruction of the war caused a "vacuum of power" in Europe and Asia that opened the way for a new wave of aggression by the Soviet Union.
Now once more we can see an aggressive tyranny that has seized control of its neighbor countries and has reduced them to satellite puppets. The Soviet Union has claimed that its action was necessary in order that it might be secure among "friendly" neighbors. But there is no security in such conquests. On the contrary, they have aroused fear among the free nations and have forced the free world to unite for protection against Soviet aggression.
The free world has told the Soviet rulers that it will not allow them to capture more and more countries, so as to become strong enough to dictate to the whole world.
But we do not want to look for world security by fighting another world war. Th devastation of such a war would be so great that civilization could not rest secure among the ruins. If total war is forced upon the world, it will not be by our choice.
16
This time the free nations have united their strength before a world war is upon them. They have united to show the aggressor a good reason for keeping the peace. If the strength of the free world is enough to persuade any would-be conqueror not to try a third world war, then we shall have won the beginning of real security.
The American understanding of security is important because the United States is leading the free nations in their effort to build a united defense. Now and then some American loses patience and calls for a "preventive war." But the concept of preventive war is intolerable to Americans. It is a violation of our fundamental moral and legal principles. A preventive war would be like the preventive suicide of the man who jumps off a bridge because he is afraid of death. It has sometimes been said that we are already at war and that the only reasonable purpose in war is to destroy the enemy. But we are not fighting World War III. We are trying to stop aggression without World War III. The United States wants peace. So do all other free peoples. The way to peace lies in the collective action 956181ยบ––52––3 17 of all free peoples in blocking aggression, whenever and wherever it appears. Preventing aggression would not be a stalemate for us. It would be a stalemate for the Soviet Union and a victory for our plans to prevent war. To be truly secure we need to find a way to keep our freedom without another world war. The best chance to find that way to security is by the policy of collective strength, which is today the policy of the United States and its allies. Collective security is not a new idea. The 50 nations meeting at San Francisco in 1945 to create the United Nations accepted the principle of col-lective action as their starting point. The present efforts of the free nations to build collective security are carry-ing forward this fundamental principle of the United Nations. In working together in the present emergency the free nations take into consideration three facts : First, the threat to security is world-wide. Free peoples everywhere are potential victims of Soviet Aggression. Second, the threat is many-sided. It is military, politi-cal, economic, and psychological. The Soviet rulers use all lines of attack, either singly or together. Third, the threat may go on for many years. The Soviet leaders may decide to attack at any time. Or they may place their hope of final victory on a prolonged campaign of subversion and terrorism – chaos without war. In response to this challenge the United States and other nations of the free world have acted. We have the Truman Doctrine. We have the North Atlantic Treaty Organization of American States, the pacts in the Pacific. Each has been tailored to meet specific situations. The objective of each is security –– for us and for the rest of the free world.
The American understanding of security is important because the United States is leading the free nations in their effort to build a united defense. Now and then some American loses patience and calls for a "preventive war." But the concept of preventive war is intolerable to Americans. It is a violation of our fundamental moral and legal principles. A preventive war would be like the preventive suicide of the man who jumps off a bridge because he is afraid of death. It has sometimes been said that we are already at war and that the only reasonable purpose in war is to destroy the enemy. But we are not fighting World War III. We are trying to stop aggression without World War III. The United States wants peace. So do all other free peoples. The way to peace lies in the collective action 956181ยบ––52––3 17 of all free peoples in blocking aggression, whenever and wherever it appears. Preventing aggression would not be a stalemate for us. It would be a stalemate for the Soviet Union and a victory for our plans to prevent war. To be truly secure we need to find a way to keep our freedom without another world war. The best chance to find that way to security is by the policy of collective strength, which is today the policy of the United States and its allies. Collective security is not a new idea. The 50 nations meeting at San Francisco in 1945 to create the United Nations accepted the principle of col-lective action as their starting point. The present efforts of the free nations to build collective security are carry-ing forward this fundamental principle of the United Nations. In working together in the present emergency the free nations take into consideration three facts : First, the threat to security is world-wide. Free peoples everywhere are potential victims of Soviet Aggression. Second, the threat is many-sided. It is military, politi-cal, economic, and psychological. The Soviet rulers use all lines of attack, either singly or together. Third, the threat may go on for many years. The Soviet leaders may decide to attack at any time. Or they may place their hope of final victory on a prolonged campaign of subversion and terrorism – chaos without war. In response to this challenge the United States and other nations of the free world have acted. We have the Truman Doctrine. We have the North Atlantic Treaty Organization of American States, the pacts in the Pacific. Each has been tailored to meet specific situations. The objective of each is security –– for us and for the rest of the free world.
Comments