DULLES REVIEWS U.S. POLICY

Press, Volume XCV, Issue 28259, 23 April 1957, Page 11

DULLES REVIEWS U.S. POLICY

“Collective Security Here To Stay”

(N.Z. Press Association—Copyright) (Rec. 11 p.m.) NEW YORK, April 22. The United States Secretary of State (Mr Dulles), in an optimistic review of United States foreign policy, said today that the free world would stick by its collective security programme so that the Soviet Union could not make armed aggression a “paying proposition.”

Mr Dulles, setting forth what he termed the basic concepts guiding United States foreign policy, said that Soviet assaults on Western military alliances would not disintegrate the free world. “Collective measures are here to stay,” he said.

Mr Dulles said there was hope I' for progress in disarmament talks, the Soviet Union was beset by internal difficulties, there was a good chance of peace in the Middle East and the power of the free world was growing. Major points he made included: Collective security among the free nations would stay in spite of Soviet attacks. A strong “mobile retaliatory power” would be maintained by the West as the principal deterrent to aggressive war. The United StateS would continue to supply military aid to its allies. There was hope for world disarmament although it would come “by steps carefully measured and carefully taken.” The United States would try to “spread the blessings of peace” to undeveloped nations with newly-gained independence and prevent fruition of Communist designs on new, unstable countries. The United States would continue its economic aid to foreign ' countries. ’ The Soviet orbit of nations was under great “pressure” for change. The United States would try to help satellite nations gain freedom although it would not incite violent revolt. The Soviet Union’s satellite strength was weakened. The United States would continue to work through the United Nations for peace in conformity with justice and international law. The United States challenged the invasion of Egypt by Britain and France because it was against the use of force.