OCR Text |
Show (Scliind lite Jeculiine6 really spectacular space feat before be-fore the GOP convention, a public pub-lic outcry for a defense space program closer to the Rockefeller Rocke-feller position could be expected. expect-ed. This is why many Rockefeller Rocke-feller backers still believe he is keeping the door open to presidential presi-dential draft. Should it occur after the GOP convention, Republicans, including includ-ing Vice President Nixon, fear it would turn the apparent GOP edge for the Presidency into a tough, uphill fight. It would also force Nixon to either continue con-tinue his support of the President's Presi-dent's more conservative space missiles position or repudiate it, edge away and urge more defense de-fense spending. This, if it occurs could force Nixon into an open break with the President on the single topic he, himself, insists he has no peer. It would also favor those Democratic Demo-cratic presidential hopefuls in leading the congressional defense debate. But in the meantime, the hearings pose more tantalizing questions than thev answer. President Eisenhower has been having more trouble with his own generals that French president presi-dent De Gaulle has been having with his. It has been the Congressional Con-gressional Democrats who have really had the Administration under fire in the military budget debate. At least two leading Democratic presidential possibilities are now counting heavily on the space missiles dispute to become the really decisive issue of the presidential presi-dential congressional elections this year. These are, of course, Senate Majority Leader Lyndon Johnson John-son of Texas, who has shrewdly moved into the key chairmanship chairman-ship of the Senate Space committee com-mittee and Senate Preparedness subcommittee, now probing the Administration's space missiles policies, and Sen. Stuart Symington Sym-ington of Missouri, member of both, who has established himself him-self as an "unofficial Secretary of Defense." Sen. Hubert Humphrey also has an opportunity to approach - How can the Democrats effectively effec-tively challenge Defense Secretary Secre-tary Thomas S. Gates, Adminis-trtion Adminis-trtion defense policies and its military intelligence evaluation, etc., after voting unanimously to I confirm his recess appointment? On Jan. 25 critics charged that Gates' policies "menaced the country." But what is the untold story of Gates' confirmation, which occurred Jan. 26 when only two senators Democratic Leader Johnson and GOP Leader Everett Dirksen were on the Flor? How can Johnson in particular, par-ticular, hope to sincerely contest con-test Pentagon policies when he eased the way for Gates to put them into effect? And, Republicans ask, how can Sen. Stuart Symington challenge the President's space missiles program when, as Harry Truman's Tru-man's Secretary of the Air Force Symington halted the Atlas IC-BM IC-BM project. Approval of a proposed pro-posed intercontinental ballistic the defense issue obliquely,, as chairman of the Senate Disarmament Disarm-ament subcommittee. So in addition addi-tion to the attacks that might be expected on the Administration's Administra-tion's defense policies by these presidential candidates outside of Congress, Congress itself is really pouring it on. This columnist mentioned last October that "political pressure would settle the steel strike, and other leading issues such as a farm program, education, even civil rights and labor reform seem to have lost their strong general appeal. But space has "political glamor" and is easily understood. Even kids can ask, "Why do we seem to be losing the race for space?" Many Democrats are certain that this is really their winning issue and not because of the "missiles gap," "air bomber alert" or all the other issues we are hearing about in the budget debate. Because the chances have been considered very great that the Soviet Union planned to launch a man into space or perform another an-other spectacular space feat before be-fore or shortly after the mid-May Summit conference, to further strengthen Khrushchev's negotiating nego-tiating position and enhance the Red prestige. If this occurred, if the Soviet feat were dramatic enough, if the U.S. failed to launch its own Astronauts this fall as planned, or worse, if one should perish a public reaction comparable to the 1957 Sputnik outcry would be inevitable. Democratic criticism of the U. S. space missiles and military policies, now largely ignored by the public, might sweep today's critics into office even as many Republicans fear. Vice President Nixon's presidential presi-dential hopes would suffer most. Nixon has thus far implied support sup-port of President Eisenhower's space missiles and defense program, pro-gram, agreeing with the President Presi-dent himself, that "no one is more qualified than Gen. Eisenhower Eisen-hower to evaluate the defense missiles program during the Truman Tru-man Administration would have given the U.S. a 10 year lead over the Soviets in this life or death field. But whenever these charges come up, Democrats also ask an embarrassing question. President Eisenhower was U.S. Army chief of staff from Nov. 1945, until Feb. 1948. The German born rocket genius, Dr. Wehner Von Braun was urging the U.S. Army testing German V-2 rockets to undertake a bold space missiles program. Did Gen. Eisenhower then support or opppose or ignore ig-nore such requests? While Supreme Su-preme Commander of NATO in 1950-52 did he regard rockets as essential to Allied defense? Where, critics chide, was the President's "superior military judgment" then? What was Mr. Nixon's position while in Congress? Con-gress? But there is of course no end to this. What is important is the space defense program undertaken under-taken now to meet the present day challenge, and we are bound to hear much more of that in the months ahead. I New York Gov. Nelson Rockefeller Rocke-feller has taken an exactly opposite oppo-site position, challenging the President's evaluation of Soviet military threat. The Rockefeller Brothers Fund Reports urged a national defense budget nearer $51 billion than the $41 billion the President asks. Should the Soviets perform a |