TREATIES FOR DEFENCE

New Zealand Listener, Volume 31, Issue 790, 10 September 1954, Page 22

TREATIES FOR DEFENCE

Extracts from a recent commentary on the international news, broadcast from the Main: National Stations of the NZBS

HE prolonged delay in securing unconditional French acceptance of EDC gives us ‘an opportunity to re-examine its desirability. Few will doubt its contribution to military defence, but many will. wonder whether that is sufficient justification. It seems to be fairly certain that the establishment of the European Defence Community must be bought at the price of a divided Germany. And who. can believe that the continued division of Germany is a good thing? .... A second consideration that needs.to be borne in mind is that military arrangements like the European Defence Community and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, of which EDC is intended to be a corner-stone, tend to preserve the status quo. Political change introduces an element of uncertainty into military plans and a@trangements. For that reason it is suspect. Any thorough-going social and economic reforms are apt to arouse opposition as being inimical to defence Tequirements. The result is that they are postponed ‘indefinitely. .. There is a final consideration which appears too often to have been overlooked in our thinking about defence

schemes in general: and the European Defence Community in particular. The world we live in is one world. Our policy ought to emphasise that fact. The brotherhood of man is an idea that is nowadays suspect or dismissed as a visionary ideal. But it is upon this very ideal that we must explain the continued existence of the United Nations. . . Technically, of course, regional defence arrangements are contemplated by the Charter of the United Nations, and are certainly not inconsistent with the letter of that instrument. But.it is difficult to feel that defence arrangements like NATO and the European Defence Community are in accord with the spirit of the’Charter. They emphasise the divisions of the world; they are a bar to international co-operation; though intended to prevent war, they often serve to heighten international tension; and they have an insidious effect on our

thinking by making us accustomed to regarding some nations as "enemies" or "aggressors." . «+

NESS sz Wo LUK

HE function of the South-East Asia Treaty Organisation is again primarily one of defence. . . It is thought that the establishment of some organisation which would co-ordinate defence arrangements in the region of SouthEast Asia would act as a deterrent to the repetition of Communist aggressive adventures in that area. Though the

Name that has been given in the newspapers to this pro-

jected organisation is similar to that of NATO, the scheme of the two organisations will be different. Under NATO the forces of member countries are stationed in the territories of other member countries-hence the continued presence of United States forces in Britain and of British forces in France. Furthermore, the forces of member countries are placed under the control of NATO and commanded by officers appointed by the organisation. . . The scheme of the proposed organisation is merely to co-ordinate defence arrangements and set up some machinery for the purposes of immediate consultation if a threat should arise. But even these modest proposals have not met with much enthusiasm from the South-East Asian countries. We ought to hesitate long in an area whose inhabitants are so lukewarm in their support...

Indeed, it appears that our efforts are mis-directed. Our thinking has been geared to traditional ideas of aggression. . . We are too prone to believe that we can protect our democratic way of life by defensive alliances-that all we need do is shut out alien ideologies or stifle them when they show themselves within. The comforting notion of peaceful co-existence between Communism and democracy has perhaps supported us in that belief. If by "peaceful co-existence" we and. the Communists mean that neither of us will let slip the dogs of war to force our ideology down each other’s throats, that is much to be thankful for. But it is dangerous in the extreme to believe that competing ideas can ever peacefully co-exist. One will always strive for mastery. We must learn that democracy will only be safe when it has proved its superiority to Communism as an idea. And this it cannot do by sheltering behind defensive alliances; it needs the spirit of adventure. The British have shown us a better course to follow in South-East Asia, What is needed is an extension to beneficent arrangements like the Colombo Plan, whereby the nations in that region, assisted by their wealthier partners from the West, bend all their energies towards achieving a decent standard of living and way of life for the inhabitants of South-East Asian countries. ..

G. P.

BARTON

August 21, 1954.