A Call for Joint Action

Before the 85th Congress was three days old.,Dwight Eisenhower appeared on Capitol Hill to seek approval of the new doctrine designed to keep Communism out of the Middle East (TIME, Jan. 7). Before him in crowded rows and galleries sat the members of the Senate and House of Representatives, the members of the diplomatic corps (except the Russians and satellites, who stayed home), the Justices of the Supreme Court, the Cabinet and packed public galleries. The gravity of the occasion was indicated by the fact that a President had not in modern times addressed a new Congress in advance of his State of the Union message.

The Tenets. The President, appearing on TV as well as in the House Chamber, began by explaining the long-term tenets of U.S. policy in the complex, tense and oil-rich Middle East, "the crossroads of the continents of the Eastern Hemisphere." Ever since World War I, said he, the U.S. has welcomed and encouraged the growth of newly independent nations; now the U.S. supports the sovereignty and independence "of each and every nation in the Middle East."

By contrast, Russia's aim ever since the days of the Czars has been to dominate the Middle East, and today the Bolsheviks are following the pattern for reasons of "power politics" as part of their "announced purpose of communizing the world.

"If the nations of that area should lose their independence," said Ike, "if they were dominated by alien forces hostile to freedom, that would be a tragedy for the area . . . Western Europe would be endangered just as though there had been no Marshall Plan, no North Atlantic Treaty Organization. The free nations of Asia and Africa, too, would be placed in serious jeopardy. All this would have the most adverse, if not disastrous, effect upon our own nation."

During the world crisis of last fall the U.S. turned to the U.N. "as a protector of small nations," and the U.N. was "able to bring about a cease-fire and withdrawal of hostile forces from Egypt because it was dealing with governments and peoples [i.e., the British, French and Israelis] who had a decent respect for the opinions of mankind." But not so the Soviets, who had ignored the U.N.'s repeated resolutions for withdrawal of Soviet troops from Hungary. "Therefore," said the President, "the U.N. can always be helpful, but it cannot be a wholly dependable protector of freedom when the ambitions of the Soviet Union are involved."

The Specifics. In the bitter aftermath of Budapest, world Communism desperately needs a new and recognizable success--and it is in the Middle East that such a success seems to beckon. Therefore, said Ike, spelling out the way U.S. collective-security planning had helped in Western Europe, Greece, Turkey and the Far East, "it is now essential that the U.S. should manifest through joint action of the President and the Congress our determination to assist those nations of the Mideast area which may desire that assistance." That was why he had come before them to request stand-by congressional authority to:

P:| Employ U.S. armed forces to help protect any Middle Eastern nation desiring help against overt aggression from "any nation controlled by international Communism," e.g., Russia or any old or new-found satellite.

P: Undertake programs of U.S. military assistance to any Middle Eastern nation "or group of nations" requesting it.

P: Spend upwards of $400 million of U.S. funds in the general area of the Middle East "in the development of economic strength dedicated to the maintenance of national independence."

Ike was quick to lay out reassurances for some of the doubts that had worried congressional leaders in earlier conferences at the White House. Even if Congress grants him stand-by power to use force, he will maintain "hour-by-hour contact" with Congress in the event of crisis and recall Congress if it has adjourned. The new doctrine will not bypass the U.N., but will enable the U.N. to tackle the internal problems of the area, e.g., Israel's borders, with less fear of external aggression. And as for the nagging fears of Arab nationalists that the U.S. might be stoking up a colonialism of its own (see below), the President four times reiterated that U.S. aid is available only to those who voluntarily and freely request it, and announced that he will "promptly" send a special mission to the Middle East to explain the new doctrine to the Mideast leaders.

The Greatest Risk. What of the favorite tactic of Communists, indirect aggression or subversion? "Experience shows," said Ike, "that indirect aggression rarely if ever succeeds where there is reasonable security against direct aggression, where the government possesses loyal security forces, and where economic conditions are such as not to make Communism seem an attractive alternative. The program I suggest deals with all three aspects of this matter . . .

"In the situation now existing, the greatest risk, as is often the case, is that ambitious despots may miscalculate. If power-hungry Communists should either falsely or correctly estimate that the Middle East is inadequately defended, they might be tempted to use open measures of armed attack. If so, that would start a chain of circumstances which would almost surely involve the U.S. in great military action. I am convinced that the best insurance against this dangerous contingency is to make clear now our readiness.

"The policy which I outline involves certain burdens and indeed risks . . . but the occasion has come for us to manifest again our national unity in support of freedom and to show our deep respect for the rights and independence of every nation--however great, however small."

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