Henry
Wallace, Secretary of Commerce, favoured co-operation with the
Soviet Union. In private he disagreed with Harry
S. Truman about what he considered
to be an aggressive foreign policy. Wallace went public about his
fears at a meeting in New York in September, 1946. As a result, Truman
sacked Wallace from his administration.
On 12th March, 1947, Harry S. Truman,
announced details to Congress of what eventually became known as the
Truman Doctrine.
In his speech he pledged American support for "free peoples who
are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside
pressures". This speech also included a request that Congress
agree to give military and economic aid to Greece in its fight against
communism. Truman asked for $400,000,000 for this aid programme. He
also explained that he intended to send American military and economic
advisers to countries whose political stability was threatened by
communism.
(1)
Henry Wallace, speech in New York (12th
September, 1946)
I plead for an America
vigorously dedicated to peace - just as I plead for opportunities
for the next generation throughout the world to enjoy the abundance
which now, more than ever before, is the birthright of men.
To achieve lasting peace, we must study in detail just how the Russian
character was formed - by invasions of Tarters, Mongols, Germans,
Poles, Swedes, and French; by the intervention of the British, French
and Americans in Russian affairs from 1919 to 1921. Add to all this
the tremendous emotional power with Marxism and Leninism gives to
the Russian leaders - and then we can realize that we are reckoning
with a force which cannot be handled successfully by a "Get tough
with Russia" policy. "Getting tough" never bought anything
real and lasting - whether for schoolyard bullies or businessmen or
world powers. The tougher we get, the tougher the Russians will get.
We must not let our Russian policy be guided or influenced by those
inside or outside the United States who want war with Russia.
(2)
President Truman, speech to Congress (12th
March, 1947)
At the present moment
in world history nearly every nation must choose between alternative
ways of life. The choice is often not a free one. One way of life
is based upon the will of the majority, and is distinguished by free
institutions, representative government, free elections, guarantees
of individual liberty, freedom of speech and religion, and freedom
from political oppression.
The second way of life is based upon the will of a minority forcibly
imposed upon the majority. It relies upon terror and oppression, a
controlled press and radio, fixed elections, and the suppression of
personal freedom. I believe that it must be the policy of the United
States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation
by armed minorities or by outside pressures.
(3)
Andrei Vyshinsky, Soviet Union spokesman
at the United Nations, speech (18th September,
1947)
The so-called Truman Doctrine
and the Marshall Plan are particularly glaring examples of the manner
in which the principles of the United Nations are violated, of the
way in which the organization is ignored. This is clearly proved by
the measures taken by the United States Government with regard to
Greece and Turkey which ignore and bypass the United States as well
as the measures proposed under the so-called Marshall Plan in Europe.
This policy conflicts sharply with the principles expressed by the
General Assembly in its resolution of 11th December, 1946, which declares
that relief supplies to other countries "should at no time be
used as a political weapon". It is becoming more and more evident
to everyone that the implementation of the Marshall Plan will mean
placing European countries under the economic and political control
of the United States.
The so-called
Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan are particularly glaring
examples of the way in which the principles of the United Nations
are violated, of the way in which the Organisation is ignored. As
is now clear, the Marshall Plan constitutes in essence merely a variant
of the Truman Doctrine adapted to the conditions of postwar Europe.
In bringing forward this plan, the United States Government apparently
counted on the cooperation of the Governments of the United Kingdom
and France to confront the European countries in need of relief with
the necessity of renouncing their inalienable right to dispose of
their economic resources and to plan their national economy in their
own way. The United States also counted on making all these countries
directly dependent on the interests of American monopolies, which
are striving to avert the approaching depression by an accelerated
export of commodities and capital to Europe.
It is becoming more and
more evident to everyone that the implementation of the Marshall Plan
will mean placing European countries under the economic and political
control of the United States and direct interference by the latter
in the internal affairs of those countries. Moreover, this plan is
an attempt to split Europe into two camps and, with the help of the
United Kingdom and France, to complete the formation of a bloc of
several European countries hostile to the interests of the democratic
countries of Eastern Europe and most particularly to the interests
of the Soviet Union. An important feature of this Plan is the attempt
to confront the - countries of Eastern Europe with a bloc of Western
European States including Western Germany. The intention is to make
use of Western Germany and German heavy industry (the Ruhr) as one
of the most important economic bases for American expansion in Europe,
in disregard of the national interests of the countries which suffered
from German aggression.
(4)
Izvesta, newspaper published in the Soviet Union (13th March,
1947)
Commenting on Truman's message to Congress, the New York Times
proclaims the advent of the "age of American responsibility".
Yet what is this responsibility but a smokescreen for expansion? The
cry of saving Greece and Turkey from the expansion of the so-called
"totalitarian states" is not new. Hitler used to refer to
the Bolsheviks when he wanted to open the road for his own conquests.
Now they want to take Greece and Turkey under their control, they
raise a din about "totalitarian states".
(5)
John Foster Dulles, speech (29th March,
1954)
The free nations want peace. However, peace is not had merely by wanting
it. Peace has to be worked for and planned for. Sometimes it is necessary
to take risks to win peace just as it necessary in war to take risks
to win victory. The chances for peace are usually bettered by letting
a potential aggressor know in advance where his aggression could lead
him.
(6)
George Kennan, Foreign Affairs Journal
(July, 1957)
It is clear that the main element of any United States policy towards
the Soviet Union must be that of a long-term, patient but firm and
vigilant containment of Russian expansive tendencies. It is clear
that the United states cannot expect in the foreseeable future to
enjoy political intimacy with the Soviet regime. It must continue
to regard the Soviet Union as a rival, not a partner, in the political
arena.
Available from Amazon Books
(order below)
