Split in Ideologies, Power Imperil World: Stevenson

The unstable power balance between democracy and aggressive Communism in Europe, and the revolution of ideologies in Asia peril world peace above all other threats, Adlai E. Stevenson said in last night's second Godkin Lecture.

Drawing on the historical background of his first address, Stevenson concluded that even without the threat of Russia, the U.S. would be faced with "the revolution of rising expectations"--Stevenson defined this as pressure from the Eastern world for engineering aid, industrialization, and relief from chronic unemployment.

Stevenson said that, though the struggle for power shows itself most in Western Europe, a balance is now evolving there. He added that Moscow's influence in the war of ideas was ebbing in Europe.

In Asia, however, where ideologies are in revolution, Stevenson thought the situation was reversed. He claimed that new political independence and nationalism make the young Eastern administrations unsteady.

Speaking before another capacity crowd in Sanders Theatre, Stevenson dwelt mostly on the power balance in Western Europe, promising to expand on the Asian situation in his concluding lecture this evening. Last night's speech was entitled "Perpetual Peril," a part of of Stevenson's series called "A Troubled World."

Treacherous Bear

Stevenson began his analysis of Soviet power and the Allied counterchecks with a description of U.S. disillusion after World War II, "when the treacherous Russian bear, our comrade in arms, rose up to bite the hand that fed it . . .

"Today there can be no more surprises about the nature of communist imperialism, about its cold drive for expansion, about it willingness to use every means from military aggression to the Trojan horse tactics of fifth columns and internal subversion in every country in the world. Today, if anything, we are over-inclined to let fear--a bad master--dictate our response to events; and we have certainly let the exploiters of fear reach unconscionable heights of power in our own country."

To Stevenson, the last seven years of expense, taxes, and casualties marked the peak of the power struggle. Democracy has shown, he stated, its ability to compete with totalitarianism where cooperation and persuasion must off-balance the enemy's coercion and command.

Setting Down

"I think it can be said, briefly and soberly, that we have survived the crisis, that an unsteady equilibrium has been established, but that no settlement is in sight and that we are now settling down for the long haul," Stevenson said.

He pointed out that Communism faces formidable obstacles in its lack of moral, spiritual, or cultural content. "Yet, armed with a fanatical faith and a program of dogmatic reform in a time of tension and changes . . . it is a foe we can underestimate only at the risk of our own destruction.

"In short, we live in a time of perpetual peril, and the end is not in sight. I won't attempt to guess whether this is a 30-years war or a 100-years war. . . ." Stevenson added that this struggle would not turn out well for America if the military or ideological coalition between western democracies is impaired.

He foresaw one possible stable balance with an 'independent and united Europe making a three-way mutual security pact with both the Allies and the Soviet Union. Stevenson termed the plan "remote conjecture," however, and said that improving the present power balance was our immediate concern. Nowadays, he said, "our coalition speaks with many voices and many tongues. Intra-community bickering, conflict, and mistrust obscure the steady vision of extra-community danger. And as we saw in Europe, first in 1914 and again in 1939, a house divided against itself will fall."

No Static Balance

In emphasizing that a balance of power is not a static thing, Stevenson criticized the theory of instantaneous atomic retaliation as insufficient to retain such a balance. Such a policy prevented neither Korea nor the situation in Indochina, he said.

Stevenson drew applause and one of the evening's few partisan reactions when he added, "We have all been somewhat reassured by recent statements from official sources that it is not our intention to rely in the future, any more than we have in the past, on a single weapon or a single strategy. But, if this is the case, I can hardly see what is so 'new' about the 'new look'!"

Warning the U.S. to remember that the nations of Western Europe are our allies and not satellites, Stevenson called their new scrutiny and criticism of our policies a wholesome sign. "We should certainly rejoice that our friends in Europe are not resigned to permanent dependency and, henceforth, propose to assume a more positive part in the direction of our common concern."

A Fellow Worker

Stevenson also pointed out that Europeans view the Communists in their countries differently than do the Americans. When we think of one of these communists, we think of a malevolent conspirator. "Most Europeans, on the other hand, think of a neighbor, friend, fellow worker or even relative who votes communist not to express his approval or preference for Russia, but to express his disapproval of the conditions in which he lives and works."

Turning to the problems in Asia, Stevenson said that the U.S. would be as "deeply concerned with these lands if Marx, Lenin, and Stalin had never lived. For poverty, oppression and ignorance have always been our concern. . . ."

Stevenson called again for understanding of a foreign people, suggesting that our alliance with the colonial powers of the West have made the East suspect our professed devotion to freedom as hypocritical. He called on America to "avoid the sins of self-righteousness and self-delusion in Asia. Our power," he concluded, "is not absolute nor is our faith infallible.