Moment of Triumph

The halls of Congress resounded last week with a strange and unfamiliar sound: praise of Secretary of State Dean Acheson. Some of his sharpest Republican critics led the chorus. "The job which Secretary Acheson did in presiding over the conference was outstanding," said California's William Knowland, who watched the San Francisco conference on the Japanese Treaty as an observer. "Commendable and brilliant," added New Jersey's H. (for Howard) Alexander Smith, an experienced adder. Even Ohio's Robert Taft conceded that Acheson had done a "very good job."

Harry Truman was turkey-proud. This shows, Truman told reporters triumphantly, that "he's a lot smarter than any of these guys who have been attacking him." At his press conference, Truman squelched a rumor that Acheson was about to resign in his moment of triumph: "As long as I am President of the United States, he is going to be Secretary of State." said Harry Truman flatly.

Ill-Matched Team. The Secretary's new popularity and the President's jubilation drew renewed attention to that loyal and ill-matched team, Truman and Acheson. The President has no long background in foreign affairs, is fascinated by Acheson's wide knowledge and his quick lawyer's ability to organize facts into telling arguments. Whenever Acheson has taken part in closed international conferences. U.S. and foreign observers have described his performance with the same word that Republican Smith used: "Brilliant." At San Francisco, all the world could see and admire the Acheson competence in a conference room.

This competence, however, was almost irrelevant to the main charge against the Administration's foreign policy: that in instance after instance it failed to find the right direction for the U.S. or, when it did, to move vigorously in that direction.

Some samples:

1) Initiative on the Japanese Treaty came not from the Truman-Acheson team but from General MacArthur and John Foster Dulles.

2) Last fall and winter the U.S. failed to take a strong line with the British over Iran, made no really vigorous effort to prevent the calamity until it happened.

3) Last September Acheson was his usual brilliant self at the Waldorf conference of Foreign Ministers, which bogged down over French objections to the U.S. plan for rearming Germany. If the U.S. Government had known its own mind, the U.S. could have broken down the French objections, or given way, or compromised. It did nothing until last week (see above). Meanwhile a precious year was lost.

4) Truman-Acheson still have not developed a policy to meet the threat of a China gone Communist.

Acheson would probably be one of the great U.S. Secretaries of State if he happened to work for a President who knew what he wanted. Truman would probably be happy to go along with a far-seeing Secretary of State able to take the initiative in high policy. As it is, neither man gets from the other what he needs.

To Prevent Fumbles. The new (and deserved) recognition of Acheson's "brilliance" would not end distrust of U.S. foreign policy in the nation or the Congress. Last week Senator Knowland had little trouble rounding up 56 Senators (including 17 Democrats) who signed a letter to Truman declaring their fixed opposition to recognition or a U.N. seat for Red China. In a pointed warning, they declared that they would consider any move of Japan's to recognize or to negotiate a trade agreement with Red China "adverse to the best interests of the people of both Japan and the U.S."

Knowland urged quick ratification of the Japanese Treaty. "Now that we have the diplomatic ball, we should continue to hold it and not fumble it," said Knowland.

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