What Kind of Europe?

There was no longer any doubt that Congress would finally approve some kind of European Recovery Plan. The debate last week was heated, but it was mostly over secondary details.

Of much more importance was another question: What will the Administration do with the money when it gets it? How will it use ERP to get what it wants in Europe? What kind of Europe does the U.S. want?

New York Times Correspondent James B. Reston reported this week that there was a sudden realization in high Washington quarters that a political ERP might be as necessary as an economic recovery program--that, in fact, it should perhaps have been laid down long ago.

"While we are taking great chances," wrote Reston, "we have not defined our political and strategic moves clearly; and neither our own people nor the Europeans have the requisite confidence in the objectives or continuity of our political policy. . . .

"As it is now. . . we are getting the worst of every compromise we make. Money is voted for a 'recovery' program but the measures necessary to recovery on the other side are not taken. An air base is opened in Libya. Marines are sent to the Mediterranean; but again they are enough to disturb Moscow without reassuring Rome, Paris or London."

The lack of agreement in Washington among President, Cabinet members, administrators, Army, Navy and Air Force officers and Congress added no reassurance. As long as the U.S. could not define its moves, the European nations would not be able to plan and coordinate theirs.

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