OCR Text |
Show Cooperation for Peace Based on Compromise Wtk Ua Nations Must Yield Some Sovereignty to mf -1 11 Lend Helping Hand Against Threats 'JL To World Security. n -m By BAUKIIAGE JVettl Analyst and Commentator. WXU Service, Union Trust Building. Washington, D. C. SAN FRANCISCO. The tumult and the shouting dies, the captains and the kings depart, still stands Thine ancient sacrifice an humble and a contrite heart. ... so said Kipling in describing the end ot a war ("far-called our navies melt away.") As I review this chapter of current history here at San Francisco Fran-cisco where the world security organization or-ganization Is In the making, I am Impressed with one thing: what has already been achieved containing merit and the seeds of hope for a peaceful world has been achieved by the sacrifice offered by the humble hum-ble and contrite hearts. That sounds somewhat idealistic perhaps but let me explain. I think It is not an exaggeration to say that compromise Is the keystone key-stone of harmony whether it is a question of interpersonal, inter-party, inter-party, interstate or international relations. re-lations. And what Is compromise but sacrifice? ,' Applied to the United Nations conference con-ference on International organization, organiza-tion, sacrifice of national aspiration, aspira-tion, and compromise which meant yielding actual selfish advantage of the moment In the hope of gaining potential advantage for the general good, have at least given evidence of good wilL Good will. Implemented by popular endorsement, means practical progress toward peace. Peace More Natural Than War You may have read a very trencn-ant trencn-ant article by Emery Reves. authority au-thority and writer on international affairs in the current Mercury magazine, which confutes the argu-. argu-. ment that since war is a part of human nature, it can never be prevented. pre-vented. Mr. Reves goes about his task of disproving this convent mlde of the pessimist in a highly scientific manner. "Why," he asks, "did cities once wage war against each other and why do they no longer fight each other with weapons today? "Why, at certain times did great landowner barons war with each other and why have they ceased the practice? "Why did the various churches plunge their adherents into armed warfare and why today, are they able to worship side by side without with-out shooting each other? Why did Scotland and England, the author continues, and other parts of what are now single nations, once fight and now live together peacefully? Reves points out that these and other groups, presumably because it was the nature of the beast to once consider It natural to decide their differences with tooth, claw, powder pow-der and shot, or bow and arrow and yet that kind ot legal murder no longer exists and would horrify modern mod-ern man. This is his answer to these provocative questions: "Wars between these social units cease to exist the moment sov ereign power is transferred to a larger or higher unit." That Is worth pondering. Yield Sovereignty To Higher Community The sovereign power of the cities yielded to the power of the nation; England and Scotland yielded their separate sovereignty to the sovereignty sover-eignty of the Itritlih crown. This occurred oc-curred as a part ot the due process of civilisation which began when the individual cave man agreed to abide by the rules of the tribe, the tribe submitted to the will ot the community and so on until the process produced the United States. Here Is a vast area occupying a huge sector ot a great continent, which, after a bloody war where state rights versus federal authority author-ity was the Issue, became a unified whole. Hates, rivalries, competition, religious and economic difference continue (as a part of human nature) na-ture) but internecine strife is unthinkable. un-thinkable. Where's the rub. then? Just, "sovereignty" "sov-ereignty" which is a fighting word, still today The United States Is willing, will-ing, anxious to participate In the United Nations organization the people have given that mandate to both parties. But will she yield her sovereignty? If so, how much? If she will not, It Is largely a matter mat-ter of Ignorance as to what that sacrifice involves. And who makes the sacrifice? The people themselves them-selves or some abstraction known as the "government?" At this point let me quote that other student of International relations, rela-tions, who, it Is true, does not raise his sight to the point of world feder- j ation but who has urged it on a more limited basis. I refer to Clarence Streit who has long campaigned for a federal union of the north Atlantic democracies, j He says that the only loss of sovcr- ! eignty Involved is the subordination 1 of the ruling bodies to the ruling i body of the union, that a citizen still j has the right of franchise and all the rest of his rights. Does the citizen of Richmond, Va., j who, after the secession of the southern south-ern states owed his allegiance to the Confederacy, enjoy any less rights today when the seat of his federal government Is the capital ot all the United States. Is the Scotsman in Edinburgh deprived of any privileges privi-leges which he held when he was a subject of chieftain, laird or Scottish king? On the contrary. U. S. Learn$ to Give and Take The American representative who sits in the assembly or is chosen to the council of the proposed United Nations organization is no less the servant of John Q. Citizen of Bing-viUe Bing-viUe than the man he elects. In proportion to their size, there are no less rivalries between San Francisco and Los Angeles than there are between any two nations 1 of the earth. But cities and states of our federal union would no more think ot attempting armed warfare with each other than any decent law-abiding citizen would think of shooting up his neighbor to get his radio, his wife or his parking privi leges. We are that civilized. We accept ac-cept the sacrifice of sovereignty ot our home state to sovereignty under the United States. When we advance to the point where we can sacrifice the degree of sovereignty of our nation necessary neces-sary in order to guarantee world order we will be civilized enough to be sure that our sons won't run the chance of killing and being killed as part of a spectacle of mass murder which even the horrors hor-rors of this war will pale. The San Francisco conference can present a blue print of the machinery ma-chinery for peace. Only civilization itself can implement it. It Is easier to understand things we can see and touch than ideas f Brooks Harding was born in Nebraska and grew up with the normal nationalism of a boy who had never seen a foreign flag flying anywhere. He served In the last war In the artillery, later became Interested in aviation. He had a small aircraft factory, and then a small leather factory in New York state. He watched the League ot Nations rise and fall. He saw the United Nations start. He became convinced that unless there was some outward out-ward symbol, some outward appeal which would ' stir the Imagination and the emotions of the people, the second attempt at world harmony would fail as did the first. And so he literally left all he had with the sole purpose ot making his contribution in the form of a United Nations' flag. That flag has not been officially adopted but it flew In Washington and It flew In San Francisco a plain white field with four vertical red bars symbolizing, he says, victory, vic-tory, equality, unity and freedom. It Is sponsored by the United Nations Na-tions Honor Flag committee supported sup-ported by such contributions which he could make or which he could solicit in travels about the country. coun-try. He hopes for its official sanction. He feels that this banner may some day become the rallying In. slgnia for the people ot all peace-loving peace-loving nations, who without slackening slacken-ing their loyalty to their own country coun-try will respect and support the forces for International good will which this emblem represents. |