The Unshaved

Ever since John Kennedy appointed Adlai Stevenson as his U.N. Ambassador and Chester Bowles as his Under Secretary of State, Senate Republicans had been stropping their razors in anticipation of shaving the liberal fuzz off the foreign policy notions of the nominees. Last week, as Stevenson and Bowles appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee for their confirmation hearings, the Republicans got their chance--and both Adlai and Chester remained unshaved.

With both Stevenson and Bowles, the issue of U.S. policy toward Red China provided the key questions. And although they differed in the degree of their attitudes, both passed their tests handily.

"Impossible to Prevent." Adlai came first, and after his ornate tribute to the United Nations and its importance, Iowa's conservative Republican Senator Bourke Hickenlooper hurled the first sharp question about Communist China: "Would it be fair to say that you have taken a quite consistent position that Red China should be admitted to the United Nations?"

There was a slight edge in Adlai's reply: "No, I don't think I've ever taken that position. I've said that some time it may be necessary." To Stevenson, that some time seemed likely to come soon. United Nations backing for the U.S. stand against the admittance of Red China to the U.N., he argued, has been steadily diluted in recent years, particularly with the entry into the U.N. of aborning Afro-Asian nations. Thus, Communist China's membership in the U.N. "may be impossible to prevent."

By the time Stevenson had finished, the entire Foreign Relations Committee seemed satisfied. Said Republican Hickenlooper: "I have done whatever I could to retain you as a private citizen in the past, but I can assure you I have no intentions of that kind at this point." The committee unanimously approved Stevenson's confirmation.

"Whatever Cost." The confirmation of Chester Bowles, long anathema to conservatives, had promised an even greater controversy. But in his appearance before the Foreign Relations Committee, Bowles at times sounded almost like the late Foster Dulles. On the question of recognizing Red China: "I don't believe we should . . . The conditions that Mao Tse-tung would attach to any cooperation would demand that Taiwan become a part of Red China . . . We obviously are not going to give up Formosa." On Formosa itself: "We are going to defend Formosa, whatever the cost, whatever the risk." But Bowles did enter a plea for a "broader" U.S. policy toward China that would consider "what will happen to the whole powerful [Communist China] force over the years ... Is there a relaxation of this force, or does it explode? . . . It's not only a problem of trying to contain China. You have the problem of how do you let some of the steam out of its boilers without an explosion."

Midway in Bowles's testimony, his most formidable committee critic, Iowa's Hickenlooper, peered down at him through his rimless spectacles and said: "I want to congratulate you on your statements here this morning."

Both Stevenson and Bowles had easily and skillfully won committee approval--the sure prelude to confirmation by the entire Senate. More important, they had placed their policy opinions on record--and knew well that the Senate would be on guard to see that their conduct in office measured up to the standards of their committee presentations.

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