Our soldiers, sailors, and marines overseas are reading about the postwar plans which have become the national topic of conversation. And they are doing some thinking themselves. The goal of all is the same—to preserve the peace of the world and to prevent another world war. There are no people anywhere who are more interested or more serious about this than our men and women at the front. Between lulls in the battle, and in the foxhole conferences of blacked-out nights, they are carefully weighing the ways and means of achieving this goal so that neither they nor their children will have to go through another such conflict of arms. Their thoughts on this prime issue may be of interest to the folks back home.
Preliminary discussion always seeks to define its terms. The many problems that must be solved in the post-war world must await final solution by a caucus of interested nations. The machinery of that caucus is the first and most important problem. Upon the smooth functioning of that machinery depends the power to produce the products of peace and security. International policies must patiently await birth by a mother international plan. Of course the prenatal care which every nation now at war is giving such policies is not to be criticized, and will, in the aggregate, greatly assist in the baby being born strong, healthy, and immune to the diseases which have in the past resulted in high infant mortality of international policies. Yet our fighting men are concerned about the mother, the producer of these policies. If we can find a strong, popular, prospective mother, the offspring will cause us little worry.
We have talked about Plan 1, the formation of a union of all nations under a government modeled on that of the United States. This was advocated by Clarence Streit back in 1939. This plan appeals to an American, who believes he has the best of all possible forms of government. It might even be acceptable to Britain. But it would not be apt to appeal to many of the world’s nations who have not grown up under such a system. Russia would probably balk. And there might be a widespread idea that the United States was attempting to force its pet system on the world. Our form of government works well because it covers 130 millions of people who are similar in tradition, language, and ideals. There is no assurance that it would be acceptable to the vast groups of different races, tongues, and emotions. And no union would work unless it is acceptable to the majority of the nations.
Plan 2, Culbertson’s, divides the world into eleven regional subsidiaries, each a member of the World Federation. Many soldiers think this might have worked in pre-radio and pre-airplane days. Some strong nation in each region would emerge to mold the policies of its region, which being more or less homogeneous, would likely accept them. But the world has shrunk to the extent that no region today can make a policy which does not affect other regions. We are fighting a Nazi policy for Europe, and a Japanese policy for Greater East Asia today. Yet it is safe to say that neither Germany nor Japan, who are allied in conflict, approves the policy of the other.
Plan 3, sponsored by Hoover and Gibson, would, in effect, set up a few powerful nations to dominate the world. This is a realistic plan in view of the fact that the Big Four of the Allied Nations will be in a position after victory to do just that. But no such coalition could long maintain peace. They would force the smaller nations to combine against them, as the thirteen colonies of George III combined against England. They may be weaker than the Big Four, but it is unlikely that, in the face of such a revolt, the Big Four could present a united front. The adhesion of war dissolves in peace. One or more of the powerful nations would be sure to agree and possibly assist the revolutionists. Factions would develop, and another war would inevitably result.
Plan 4, suggested by Clarence Budington Kelland, is an obvious plan. The United States, emerging as the strongest power, could maintain its huge Army and Navy and dictate world policies. This not only goes against the grain of the average American, but would have the hearty disapproval of our armed services. We are not, and will never be, a militaristic nation. We have for years carefully avoided using dictatorial tactics toward our good neighbors of Latin America. A sudden change to such a policy would advance the next war by many years.
Plan 5, enunciated by William Hard, would create a World Union modeled upon our Pan-American Union. Each nation, large or small, would have an equal voice, but the object of the Union would be consultation. No united action could be taken unless agreement was unanimous. There would be no teeth in any agreement. Mr. Hard has seen many international conferences, and is apparently pessimistic about all except those of the Pan-American Union. Yet these conferences were all without teeth. The success of the Pan-American conference is largely due to the fact that only one great power was represented. The picture is that of a hen with a brood of chicks. A very different picture is presented by a number of hens each with its own brood of chicks. A barnyard fight will inevitably ensue unless the majority of hens, by concert of action, prevents an aggressive hen from robbing a weaker one of its feed. Mere consultation is far from enough. And let’s not forget that our good neighbor policy in Latin America costs us, according to Senator Butler, two billion dollars a year.
The men who fight know full well that wars are not fought: (1) to make the world safe for democracy, (2) to give to all the world the liberty under law which individuals in the United States enjoy, (3) to insure freedom of all from want and fear. These are ideals we all accept as ideals. But we know that economic instability is the prime mover of war, and that a system of intelligently regulated world trade is the only system which will prevent future wars. The machinery of such a system must provide a means of checks and balances based upon economic standards, and must ultimately include cogs from every nation, large or small. It must be acceptable to the majority, and the minority forced by economic pressure to participate. It must give promise of maintaining equality of opportunity for world trade and of raising the standard of living.
A practical American national policy looking toward the future adoption of an international plan has not been enunciated. Much talking around the subject, however, has been done. “Responsible participation by the United States in post-war co-operative organization ... to prevent military aggression and to attain permanent peace with organized justice in a free world” (Republican Council’s Mackinac Charter, Sept. 7, 1943). “Favoring creation of appropriate international machinery with power adequate to establish and maintain a just and lasting peace . . . and participation of the United States therein” (Fulbright Resolution in Congress). The United States should participate “in the establishment and maintenance of an association of free and sovereign nations implemented with whatever force may be necessary to maintain world peace and prevent a recurrence of war” (American Legion in National Convention). Favoring “organized international co-operation for the maintenance of peace . . . based upon the willingness of the . . . nations to use force, if necessary” (Mr. Hull’s Sept. 12, 1943, radio address). These platitudes are self-evident aims, but can scarcely be called foreign policies, and have in them no suggestion of a plan. War is a hard, cold-steel fact, and the men who win it want a peace that is based on the same cold facts. They want something practical as opposed to something merely idealistic.
The other night in one of our round- foxhole conferences, it was agreed that the method of representation in any international federation was the key to its success. One man suggested that representation, that is, votes, be based upon population. He argued that our concept of individual liberty demanded it, that each nation would thereby have a power commensurate with its responsibilities. He was reminded by another man that man power alone was not the measure of economic power. It represented more reponsibility, that is, mouths to feed, than authority. It was pointed out that China and India together might, under this plan, hold the balance of voting power, whereas they could bring the least economic pressure to bear. This would transfer the scepter from the economic lords to a group which is least prepared to shoulder the responsibilities of the throne. The conference agreed unanimously that the census could not be the basis of representation in world affairs.
For similar reasons the idea of each sovereign nation having a single vote was discarded. It had no relation to economic power. Inevitably, the bicameral house of the United States form of government was offered as a blend of the two types of representation familiar to us. Yet if neither has a foundation in the economic balance which is the cause of war, how can a blend achieve the desired result? After some discussion, including the difficulty of selling such a plan to nondemocratic nations, it was agreed that nothing yet suggested promised success.
Then a suggestion was made which drove us all into profound thought. It was a plan whereby each nation of the Federation (or Union, or League, or whatever you want to call it) would have the proportion of the total votes that its national income bears to the world income. This certainly had an economic basis which reflected the real power. The income as computed for one year would be the governing figure for the ensuing year. For each so many millions of national income, the nation would have so many representatives and an equal number of votes.
The method of choosing the representatives would be a matter for each nation to determine for itself. When the Federation convened, it could elect its chairman and its committees. The committees would formulate international policies upon which th Federation would then vote. The decision of this body would be final and binding. There can be no veto power in international affairs. Measures once passed by the Federation would not be referred to member nations for ratification or subscription. They would be binding, and revocable only by the Federation itself. Questions of interpretation would be referred to the World Court, a body created by the Federation and regulated by rules formulated by its Judiciary Committee and passed by the Federation in regular session. Disputes between member nations would be resolved before the World Court, with appeal therefrom only to the Federation itself. The judicial decision would be enforced by the Executive Committee of the Federation through its subcommittees sitting in each of the member nations’ capitals. Sanctions, embargoes, etc., could thus be made effective.
The International Treasury would be controlled by the Federation through a Treasury Committee. The treasury must be large enough to (1) pay the Federation’s fiscal expenses, including the salaries of the representatives of member nations and the expenses of maintenance of the International Police, (2) establish and maintain agencies for raising standards of living, including education, health, agriculture, manufacture, distribution, and scientific research, and (3) maintain a fund of liquid assets sufficient to convert the institutions of peace into institutions of war. This means a huge treasury, and the bigger it is, the less likelihood of any nation or combination of nations forfeiting its equity by resort to arms.
The money for this treasury will come from member nations in proportion to their national income. Initial deposits will create an equity for the paying members. Members admitted later will pay, over and above the current international tax, an entrance fee equal to the equity they would have paid as charter members. The amount of money necessary to keep the balance in the treasury at an established minimum (which should be high, and based upon a generous estimated expenditure) will be a part of the original plan, but subject to amendment by the Federation. At the beginning 'of each decade, the estimated average annual cost of the Federation for the coming ten years will be deduced. This annual cost becomes the total tax levy for each of the succeeding ten years. The member nations will pay each year the proportion of the total tax levy for that year that its last year’s national income bears to last year’s total of national incomes of all the member nations. In this way, the annual total tax remains a constant for a decade. Prosperous nations will pay more of it than those which have not had a prosperous year. If a prosperous nation can, by national policy, help a weaker nation to increase its income, it thereby reduces the tax which the helping nation must pay. On the other hand, a nation with an imperialistic economic policy which increases its income at the expense of a weaker nation automatically saddles itself with the liability for a higher proportion of the international tax. This method, if properly implemented, provides a check and balance on national pocketbooks, and impinges directly on the germ from which the cancer of war grows.
The International Police, operating directly under the control of the Federation through its Police Committee, will be composed of a huge army and navy. These fighting men will be drawn from the man power of the member nations in proportion to their national incomes. Age limits and health standards would be established by the Federation, as would the method of appointment and promotion of officers, and the choice of commanders. The term of enlistment would be set in the original plan, say, two years for enlisted men, five years for officers. The quota for each nation would be filled in a manner which each nation would determine for itself. The United States might call for volunteers, the U.S.S.R. might draft its men, and France might order out an organized unit of its own national defense force. The International Police would not normally be segregated into national blocs. As the universal language, say Basic English, adopted by the Federation became generally known and used, the amalgamation of nations in the International Police would foster an international spirit and would broaden the viewpoint of the individual policeman. After a score of years, with the rotation of forces comprising the Police, there would be in each nation a growing group of men who would appreciate the brotherhood of mankind.
How will the plan work? All will not be smooth and rosy. A culprit nation will arise and make charges and demands. The World Court will rule against it; its appeal to the Federation will be lost. It will take independent action against another nation. The Federation will bicker for weeks but will finally impose economic sanctions. International bootleggers will reduce the effectiveness of the sanctions. The culprit nation will announce that it resigns from the Federation, in defiance of its pledge upon joining, and will threaten to resort to war. The Federation will dispatch its Navy Police to blockade the culprit’s ports. The culprit will then send its national army to the borders of the nations adjacent to it. The Expeditionary Police will sail to the ports of these alarmed nations, and resist the invasion of the culprit’s forces. A fight will ensue, and some of our American boys will be killed. But the overwhelming forces of the Police, backed by a strong Navy Police and a ready treasury, will make the war a short one. Most of the fighting will be done on the culprit’s soil. His equity in the International Treasury will be used against him, being the first monies to be expended in the war. His quota in the Police will be restrained as temporary prisoners of war. He cannot hold out against the economic and military might of the Federation. He surrenders. He has not resigned. He is put on probation. When his economic condition has been bolstered, with Federation assistance, when his damages to other nations, assessed by the World Court, have been paid, and when his equity in the treasury has been repaid by him, he again becomes a member in good standing.
Some casualties and some expense will be the cost, but a devastating world conflict will have been prevented. The chances of overcoming such a Federation will be remote.
This plan undoubtedly has many flaws. But to many of the men now fighting it has possibilities. And those men will be heard sooner or later.