6 minute read
The Challenge in Foreign Policy
The Challenge Foreign Policy
By PAUL SAUNIER, JR., '40
THE UNITED STATES is necessarily about to launch, for our short-run security, a massive program of armament to match the growing military power of Communist Russia. But-what will be the worth of this if we have no plan of constructive action to prevent a further arms race, once the gap is closed?
There is a powerful' move to launch a "crash" program to train more scientists to produce more destructive weapons. What will be the worth of this if we do not concurrently graduate an even larger number of people educated broadly in the humanities, who can devise the political mechanisms to allow the various nations of the earth to live, with all their differences, instead of killing one another with the products of the laboratories?
A policy which will buy us only a few years of time-before the catastrophe-is not enough.
In my work as secretary to an influential Member of the United States House of Representatives, I am impressed with both the necessity and the stupidity of a massive Federal budget which goes chiefly, and increasingly, to pay the costs of past and future wars. Thankfully, I am also impressed with the fact that most thoughtful foreign policy observers believe there still may be time to make this new, hydrogen-age arms race different from the tragic ones of the past. They hope we can establish-now-a clear and public policy of peace, morally and practically sound, to be pursued actively when again the United States is in a position of strength in East-West relationships.
It is painful to realize that we were in such a position of strength once, at the end of World War II. A few voices called for positive long-term -action then, but in the din of victory they were not heard. The prevailing voices said, "America doesn't have to think about the rest of the world; we have the atomic bomb." Our public discussions of foreign policy then became more concerned with origins than with merits, more with elections than with solutions. Conformity of thought and a lush standard of living pushed to the front as American ideals. Building a larger recreation room in a home, or buying a second TV set, became more important than a new library or laboratory in a school. People with unusual ideas were avoided. Development of new solutions to new public problems was consequently hindered.
Now, at last, there is a change. Sputnik may prove a blessing to mankind far beyond its technical contribution if it wakes us to our peril. Their dream of American supremacy shaken, people are writing their Congressmen to say they are willing to pay the taxes required to buy safety for the future, foregoing comfort for the present. But, what constitutes safety in a world of hydrogen war-heads on intercontinental missiles?
The answer which has impressed me most in Washington lies in an analysis of the word "sovereignty." To most people "national sovereignty" means independence of action. America fought a revolution for it. But today, where is our independence of action? What made our defense budget jump $4 billion overnight? In the 1958 world, the major decisions which affect the people of the United States are not made in America, but in Russia. The Soviets act, and we react. So long as defense expenditures rule the Federal budget, this will be the case.
Approaching the subject of national sovereignty from its other aspect-the territorial point of view-has anyone asked whether the Russian satellites now passing over the United States check in at the Immigration office each day when they cross the border ? Do they clear with Customs ? Do we have their fingerprints? They "violate" the air space above United States territory every day, sending back information not available to us. It is useless to argue that we let the Sputniks pass because they are peaceful; we cannot inspect them to be sure of that. If we could, we would surely exercise our "national sovereignty" to destroy any strange, uninspected Russian object which crossed our sovereign borders. The truth is-we can't reach the Sputniks.
We have not given up any national sovereignty by treaty or law ; the march of world events has simply dissolved great chunks of it.
For a long time many wise people have predicted that the only way we would regain any portion of control over the major events which shape our lives would be by participation in a world-wide system of fool-proof, enforceable, international arms inspection and reduction. Most of their contemporaries have thought such an idea unrealistic, along with the comic books on man-made earth satellites. Now we find a new realism, and the proposal is being developed in a practical sense. It is conservative, because the only clear way to conserve private lives and private property is to avoid both war and a massive, radioactive arms race; it is liberal because it provides a new solution to a problem which affects all humanity.
This is now the announced goal of the
(Continued on page 31)
Paul Saunier , Jr., six-foot four-inch product of the class of 1940, is Executive Secretary to Congressman J. Vaughan Gary. This job entails managing the Congressman's office with its staff of three in Washington
and one in Richmond , doing research on government issues, and making
speeches. His Washington area home is 506 Fordham Drive, Alexandria, Virginia; while in Richmond he and his family live with his parents in University Heights .
Flying a Stinson , four-place , one -eng ine plane , which Saunier owns with eight other persons, al lows him to keep in close touch with the Richmond congressional distric t. On one trip to Was hington he was confron ted with a frozen winds hield in a sleet storm. He overcame this hazard by flying into the smoke from the stacks at the Sylvania plant near Freder icksb urg and the incident received national pub licity. The warm fumes melted the ice allowing him to make a forced landing safe ly.
On the national political scene he guesses that the Repub licans will nominate Vice-president Nixon for the 1960 race . Although he believes it is too eorly to tell about the Democrats , he says that since the Democratic
party is youthful it may nominate a young man who is now a governor
or senator. He believes that the day is at hand when a Southerner could run successfully for the vice-president's post or a man from a border state run successfully for the presidency of the United States.
Referring to one of the South 's big problems Mr. Saunier says, " De-segregation is basically a local problem which should be left to local solution. You can 't legislate good will.
He is a member of Sigma Phi Epsilon and Omicron Delta Kappa. looking back on his U of R days he says that he is one of the men " Dr. Mitchell built a f1re under. " One of his proudest memoirs is that he was president of ODK when it started the campus carnivals for the Alumni-Student Cen ter fund in 1940.
Mr. and Mrs. Saunier, who are Presbyterians, met in 1949 because she was ass igned by the Times-Dispatch to interview him. She is the for mer Jane Hayden Morris of Mocksvi lle, N'orth Caro lina. She attended St. Mary's and Salem . Colleges in her native State . Their three children are : Jul ia, 3¾; Edward, 2; Jane Hayden, 5 month s.
