Debaters at UN Forum Discuss Rearmament for West Germany

Last month's London-Paris agreements to give Germany arms and sovereignty may be weaker than EDC but they also "give hope for the development of the European community," Jean de la Grandville, counsellor to the French embassy in Washington, said last night.

Speaking at a UN Council forum on "Europe at the Crossroads," Grandville said the agreements, besides strengthening the defenses of western Europe, provided machinery for Franco-German cooperation, "so essential to future integration."

The treaties provide for a West European Council where most questions will be decided by unanimous vote, he explained. Questions about the Saar and armament quotas, however, will only require majority votes, providing a "hope that supranational authority will grow."

Other speakers last night were Franklin L. Ford, assistant professor of History, and Donald C. McKay, professor of History.

Era Uncertain

"Some kind of an era of good feeling will result from the treaties," Ford said, "but how long it will last is uncertain." There are strong groups, he declared, committed to the present settlement, "at least until something better comes along, but America faces long range dangers."

Germany, he said, might in the future undertake some chauvinistic demonstration against Poland, to regain her lost territories, which would upset the apple-cart. He said this is because Germany has a tradition of reverting to extreme nationalism in times of economic stress which is not encouraging. He did not, however, foresee an early overturn of the Adenauer government.

Must Be Aware of Changes

"America must become aware of changes that took place in negotiating the treaties," he said. "A diplomatic state of affairs is restored in Europe for the first time since the war, and Eden, Mendes-France, and Adenauer have come forward as near-equals to Dulles."

McKay emphasized America's problems in understanding French politics. "When we are tempted to call French political moves irrational, we should remember that much of our own politics could better be understood by a psychiatrist than a political scientist."