Quo Vadimus?

On a sultry August day nine months ago the United States Senate was swept forward by the floodtide of international optimism to vote unqualified approval of the United Nations Charter. An Administration still vibrant with the ideals of its late President had concentrated every form of pressure and political maneuvering to coerce all but the most recalcitrant of the Senators into hearty consent. Having thus hurdled the bulwark of traditional American isolationism, international planners peered with sparkling eyes into a future of unthrobbing war drums and furled battle flags. A people eager to believe took no stock in the gloomy fore-bodings of scattered pessimists.

Today, a still hostile community of nations continues to dwell in nervous tension. Confused reports from press and radio have tended to reduce the meeting of the Security Council to little more than a conflict of personalities. Gromyko frowns and all men stiffen in apprehension. His mouth twitches in the semblance of a smile, and we breathe a sigh of relief. The nation, torn by the violent pulsations of hope and despondency, shows signs of drastic deviations from its former idealism.

Despite the nakedness of a drama mercilessly floodlighted by American journalism, no fundamental flaws have developed in the United Nations. Clumsily handled and bitterly debated, the Iranian issue has nevertheless been satisfactorily dealt with for the present. While perfectionists, oblivious to the rudiments of United States constitutional history, loudly decry evidences of power politics the Security Council turns unabashed to its next job.

Grave charges may be leveled against the United Nations, and more especially against the big four who dominate it. Overemphasis has been placed on the urgency of patching up the local sore spots of a still unhealthy world. The real cures to be derived from settlement of the war and active promotion of the peace are strangely neglected. On May first, the Peace Conference is scheduled to begin, and we suddenly realize that not one real treaty agreement has been reached. With bright optimism the Big Four foreign ministers announce plans to meet on April 25th, allowing five days to clear away a stalemate of seven months duration. Needless deadlock and crisis are likely to ensue, made critical by these tardy efforts to iron out fundamental differences.

The Economic and Social Council of the United Nations, charged with the vital responsibility of promoting fair distribution of the world's resources and expansion of world trade, waits blissfully for the lazy May days to commence its work. Evidently, the Council feels that matters of economic importance are secondary, capable of being postponed until the real problems have been settled. A hungry, cold, suspicious world cries bitter contradiction.

Alone, the United States grapples with the problem of the atomic bomb. Thus far our legislators, deaf to the warnings of the leading scientists, have shown no inclination to permit international control. They give tacit credence to Winston Churchill's bland assurance that "no one sleeps less soundly in his bed" because the United States possesses the atomic bomb. Serenely, they overlook the millions who scarcely touch their beds as they labor night and day to reduce the margin of military supremacy now possessed by this country. Nor will many men anywhere sleep soundly so long as this greatest of all weapons is a playtoy of national sovereignty.

No task yet lies before the United Nations that time and tireless effort cannot accomplish. Time, however, is grudgingly granted by a people curiously expectant of modern miracles. The impatient perfectionist, continually frustrated by examples of power politics, cannot long avoid cynicism. He counts for naught the progress made when the family of nations agreed to bring their haggling within the confines of the council chamber. Exhorting the deadliness of the atomic bomb, he summons fear to promote his crusade for "real" world government.

Diametrically opposed to this is the "realist's" pattern of thought. Dogging the footsteps of Winston Churchill, he calls for an Anglo-American alliance which would freeze the balance of power within the United Nations. He calmly accepts a policy which would soon reduce the machinery of the United Nations to an instrument for imposition of Anglo-American will.

Plagued by the multiple complaints of a slowly convalescing world, retarded in attending to long run solution of its needs, partially paralyzed by hypnotic fear of the atomic bomb, buffeted by the impatience of the perfectionist and the realist alike, the United Nations has no certainty of a long and useful life. The people of the world would do well to renew the faith expressed by President Roosevelt just before his death. "The only limit to our realization of tomorrow will be our fears of today."