Wairarapa Times-Age FRIDAY, JANUARY 5, 1940. AN INCONCLUSIVE SPEECH.

Wairarapa Times-Age, 5 January 1940, Page 4

Wairarapa Times-Age FRIDAY, JANUARY 5, 1940. AN INCONCLUSIVE SPEECH.

TN his address at, the opening of Congress, reported at length yesterday, President Roosevelt had some pointed and'cutting things to say about Americans who adopted an ostrich policy and buried their heads in the sand instead of facing 1 rankly the facts and issues of the world war. lie was equally severe upon those of his countrymen who “over-simplify the situation by repeating that all we have to do is to mind our own business and keep the nation out of the war.’’ Dlr Roosevelts own utterance was, however, in some vital particulars ode y inconclusive.

While he maintained that the United States must be a potent and active factor in seeking the re-establishment ol peace, he said, for example, that:—

The overwhelming majority of our citizens do not abandon ii .the slightest their hope and expectation that the Unuted State will not become involved in military participation in the w. .

Declaring, also, that: “The time is long past when any political party can curry or capture public fflvour by itself a peace parly,” Mr Roosevelt added : 'that label belongs to the whole of the United States.”

Saviiw all this, the President at the same tune alfiVmed that the future world would be a shabby, dangerous place to live in, even for Americans, “if it is ruled by force in the hands of a few.” In their total effect these statements appear to imply that Mr Roosevelt, while acknowledging and indeed affirming that the fate and fortunes of the United States are at stake in the present war, is as content as are the eadmg exponents of American isolation to leave to the Allies the task of repellin" those who seek to overthrow democratic freedom. The faith here implied in the ultimate victory of the Allies no doubt 'is well warranted, but whether, in the circumstances as they are outlined by the President, a policy of American inaction is consistent with American self-respect perhaps may be regarded as open to question.

In effect, Mr Roosevelt has at once exposed the moral and material weakness of the policy of isolation and declared that this discredited policy must continue. Nicely adjusted as it is to the present ruling temper of the American people, m which a desire to avoid being drawn into the war figures largely, and to the exigencies of party warfare, his speech no doubt provides new proof of his ability as an astute and resourceful political leader. Whether or not he contemplates running for a third term,' Mr Roosevelt, in his references to the war and in other particulars, has done a good deal to blunt, and weaken the attack of his Republican opponents. No doubt it is excellent tactics to deny to the Republicans an opportunity of fighting the elections in November next as a peace party, in opposition to a party suspected of leading the nation into war.

At the same time, the aggressive aspects of New Deal policy have been allowed to fall into the background, and save in the ease of additional appropriations for defence which in great part are approved by all political parties and which it is proposed to meet by additional taxation, the Budget now being brought down provides in most instances for reductions in expenditure, opening the way to a reduction of the enormous deficit shown in the Federal accounts.

President Roosevelt no doubt is to be credited with, having mapped out an effective electioneering programme for the Democratic Party. He has done it in part, however, by adopting the policy of his isolationist critics—the policy under which the greatest and most powerful democracy in the world stands aside from a conflict in which the continued existence of democracy visibly is at stake.