Evening star. [volume], April 15, 1963, Page A-8, Image 8

About Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972

Image provided by: Library of Congress, Washington, DC

                
(pje Xtwninn fsfar
With Sunday Morning Edition
Published by THE EVENING STAR NEWSPAPER CO., Washington 3, D. C.
SAMUEL H. KAUFFMANN, Chairman of the Board
CROSBY N. BOYD, Proiident NEWBOLD NOYES, Uitor
BENJAMIN M. MtKELWAY, Editorial Chairman
A-8
No Jury Trial?
The Supreme Court has been asked
to decide whether Mississippi’s Governor
Ross Barnett is entitled to a jury trial on
criminal contempt charges pending
against him as an outgrowth of last
year’s rioting at the University of Missis
sippi in the Meredith case.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals
divided 4-4 on the question. The four ap
pellate judges advocating a jury trial said
that “it is much less important, in the
judicial scheme of things, that Gov. Bar
nett should escape being fined or jailed
for his publicly demonstrated contempt
of a valid oiyler of this court {does this
mean that he has been found guilty prior
to any trial?{ than that he should be
denied the jury trial which he has
demanded.” The four judges on the other
side took the position that the Supreme
Court has already held that “criminal
contempts are not subject to jury trial as
a matter of constitutional right.”
• The Supreme Court’s decision will
not be influenced by our view of this
matter. And it should not be. Nonethe
less, we feel strongly that the attempt to
bypass a jury trial for Governor Barnett
on this criminal charge is both stupid
and unjust.
There is a strong probability that a
Southern jury would be sympathetically
inclined toward the Governor, although
this would not necessarily be the case.
But what of the other side of the coin?
The prestige of the Federal courts Is at a
low ebb in the South. To put It more
bluntly, a great many people in that area
have lost confidence in the impartiality
of their Federal judges. And the no-Jury
trial attitude of four of the appellate
judges, if Governor Barnett should be
found guilty without a jury trial, will
simply add to this loss of respect and
confidence. In the long run, this could be
a very serious matter. Our feeling is that
the four appellate judges who favor a
jury trial “in the larger interests of the
judicial scheme of things” are both right
and endowed with more wisdom than
their dissenting colleagues.
It is entirely conceivable that a
Southern jury would acquit Governor
Bamett of criminal contempt when he
should have been convicted. It should not
be forgotten, however, that civil con
tempt charges, with respect to which
there is no question of a right to a jury
trial, are being held in abeyance. Furth
ermore, the concept of the right to a jury
trial on a criminal accusation is deeply
implanted in the American mind. Federal
appellate judges, Insulated, as they
should be, from the pressures of public
opinion, may be indifferent to this con
sideration. But the case of Governor Bar
nett really is more of a political than a
judicial controversy. In our belief, it will
be better if he has the benefit of what
most people, especially the people in the
South, will think of as a fair trial—
and this, we believe, meaiis a trial by
a jury of his peers. If this should result
in an unwarranted acquittal, the civil
contempt charges, as we have men
tioned, still remain to be heard.
It's Not Funny
Since his election as Michigan’s first
Negro Congressman in 1955, Representa
tive Charles C. Diggs, jr., has fought
racial discrimination wherever he has
found it—but always fairly and with a
high degree of Intelligence. We recall
his expression of outrage a few years
ago, after witnessing a gang of young
Negro hoodlums viciously beat and rob
a Negro man in an assault at Logan
Circle. Mr. Diggs described the attack
ers in a House speech as “a pack of
wolves,” and urged the Negro commu
nity of Washington to assume a greater
responsibility in the fight against local
crime. For this suggestion he was criti
cized by some within his own race.
It is the more ironical in view of this
fair-minded attitude that Mr. Diggs hap
pened to be a guest the other night in
the home of an NAACP leader in Clarks
dale, Miss., which was the target of flam
ing home-made bombs thrown by two
young white men. Fortunately these
punks have been caught and are now in
jail.
Their explanation was that they
were “just having fun”—to which there
is only one answer. There is nothing
funny about the incident, and the judge
who hears their case should Impose a
sentence which will leave no room for
doubt on that score in their minds, or in
the minds of anyone else.
Three Blind Mice
John H. Hiser, that well-known font
of wisdom on regional politics, unbur
dened himself of the profound observa
tion the other day that the Washington
Metropolitan Council of Governments
“started out to be a good-will, Dutch
treat luncheon club, but now it’s just
pyramiding into a great bureaucracy."
Accordingly, Mr. Hiser and two of his
novice colleagues- on the Montgomery
County Council cast votes which reaf
firmed their earlier decision to scorn
membership in the Council of Govern
ments—a position in which Montgomery
stands alone.
It is entirely true that the council
did little more than discuss mutual
problems in its early days—and has not,
in fact, become a real ball of fire since
then. But the fact that Its members now
are showing some desire to expand their
activities into more meaningful forms
of regional activity is not bureaucracy.
I ' v f
MONDAY, APRIL 15, 1963
It is a sign of growing mutual trust and
political maturity which has evolved
from experience.
These, of course, are traits which
Mr. Hiser and some of his associates
could not be expected to possess in
abundance at this Infant stage of their
political lives. But one need not abandon
hope. Some time ago the council dele
gated Dr. Thomas M. Wilson, among its
members perhaps the most dubious
about the Metropolitan Council, to sit
with the regional group. Dr. Wilson has
participated fully and Intelligently in
the discussions, and has come to the
conclusion that Montgomery would be
foolish to withdraw from the metropoli
tan community. A similar experience
and exposure might serve to open the
' eyes of his colleagues.
The Change in Canada
Although the mechanics of actually
transferring power and reaching a re
liable partnership with a minority bloc
are still to be worked out definitively,
Lester Pearson appears certain today
of the privilege of heading a new
Liberal Party government in Canada.
The prospect is one that is reassuring
to Canada’s neighbors on this side of
the frontier and to the many personal
and official friends who remember Mr.
Pearson from the time when he was
a popular Ambassador in Washington.
As for the formalities of trans
ferring authority, Mr. Pearson and
resigning Conservative Prime Minister
John Diefenbaker should have no dif
ficulties. The fact that the Liberals
are still three seats short of an out
right majority in the House of Com
mons, however, leaves them dependent
on voting help from some other source.
A bloc of six members of the Social
Credit Party promised this support last
week. While some of these have since
expressed qualifications about their
position, Social Credit spokesmen have
given further assurance of help to a
Liberal Government.
This is, however, a rather surprising
turn in the intra-family politics of our
good neighbor to the North, and was so
described by one Liberal Party spokes
man, Lionel Chevrier of Quebec. Mr.
Chevrier added, also, that he was parti
cularly pleased because “there are no
strings attached.”
It will be interesting if this is so. The
Social Credit Party is usually described
as a rightwing political movement. In
some ways it is. It favors a balanced bud
get, curtailment of the national debt
and elimination of many welfare pro
grams. But it proposes to accomplish
these objectives in rather strange ways—
by having the government create enough
money so there would not be a budget de
ficit, by repudiating much of the present
national debt, and by direct government
handouts to most people in need. Its poli
tical strength is concentrated largely in
the French-speaking Quebec area, still
resentful of wartime conscription.
Actually, the six who have promised
to support Mr. Pearson—except possibly
on the issue of nuclear armaments for
Canada—have professed the best of mo
tives, namely, to assure the country of a
“stable” government. Since the moder
ately left-of-center New Democratic
Party seems to be in about the same state
of mind, Mr. Pearson and his Liberals ap
pear to be in good shape. It will be their
problem to figure out how to deal with
their friends and supporters in Parlla--
ment.
George Mason College
Those citizens who have worked
long and assiduously for facilities to
house the Northern Virginia branch of
the University of Virginia, and who felt
that the State Legislature had appro
priated adequate funds to finance the
first stage of construction, were rudely
jolted when the construction blds were
opened some time ago. Even the lowest
bld was about SBBO,OOO above the amount
made available by the General Assembly.
Under the circumstances, Governor Har
rison had no choice but to reject them all.
No purpose is served by pointing the
finger at Individuals. It is evident that
the requirements presented to the Legis
lature by State officials were grievously
underestimated. The important consid
eration now, however, is that the threat
of an Indefinite setback for the George
Mason Branch College apparently has
been averted through the good offices
of Governor Harrison.
After hearing a full explanation of
the dilemma by a delegation from the
Northern Virginia region the other day,
the Governor ordered the university and
the State budget office to make as many
reductions in cost as possible without
sacrificing the basic Integrity of the
college design, and immediately there
after to seek new blds for three—and
possibly four—major buildings. There
is a possibility that funds earmarked
for the eventual construction of the
college library may be used for the initial
construction. In any event, Governor
Harrison reportedly expressed determi
nation to see the first phase of the plan
in operation by the fall of 1964.
This is good news. The construction
now proposed is only a small portion of
the physical plant which ultimately will
be needed to accommodate students
from this region. And the rapid popu
lation growth in Northern Virginia is
warning enough that there is no time
to lose.
—1
■dOOSa
'Hope He Doesn't Forget to Mention Me!'
Person to Person
Adrian Roberts, national
vice president, D. f C. area,
American Federation of Gov
ernment Employes, in an
swer to my letter protesting
against a Federal program of
union dues check-off, ac
cuses me of thinking in terms
of 1900 accounting methods.
He apparently overlooked my
reference to the extra work
load and cost in electronic
data processing. The card
would have to be redesigned
and the tabulator hookup
changed. This will happen at
hundreds, maybe thousands,
of installations. There will be
continued additions to and
cancellations from the dues
collection list. The account
ing job is not a one-shot af
fair.
I did not predict that the
unions will be required to
pay part of the union dues
collection. Joseph Young, of
The Star, has already stated
this as a fact. I did predict
that union stewards will
pressure non-slgners, and I
sincerely believe they will do
this regardless of laws, or
ders and regulations to the
contrary. Union dues collec
tion by the Federal Govern
ment is not a service which,
in my opinion, benefits the
majority of the public and.
therefore, is not in the na
tional interest. I strongly ob
ject to the use of even an
infinitesimal part of my tax
money for an unnecessary
program of limited scope.
Even if a percentage of
O/d Techites—True Sons of Tubal Cain—Are Stirred
As a native Washingtonian
and an old Techite, may I
add a few thoughts in retro
spect to those expressed in
your editorial and the letter
of E. B. Henderson on the
old days at Tech? I write of
its earliest days, when Dr.
Myers was principal and Mr.
Hecox was our machine
shop instructor. After classes,
ths latter gave his time to
coach all of the teams—foot
ball, baseball, track and even
crew. Yes. we had an eight
oared crew that practiced
week ends, using facilities of
the Potomac Boat Club,
which was no short distance
from Tech before the auto
mobile. We, as students, were
proud of our teams, for they
made an enviable record de
spite the handicap of no
gymnasium, no track and no
practice field.
Classroom facilities were
inadequate from the day
Tech opened its doors and
remained so, despite erection
of the addition on Seventh
street, three or four years
after the original building
was opened. I can recall hav
ing classes in the old Henry
Grade School at Seventh and
P streets, the Business High
School, now tom down, and
in rooms over Mooney’s lunch
room across Seventh street.
We walked to and from these
classes, regardless of weather,
and made a schedule so as
to avoid going to the wrong
building. Yet these inade
quacies in facility did not
engender complaint, affect
our pride in Tech or dimin
ish the opportunity to get a
well-rounded high school
education. The curricula pre
pared its graduates for im
mediate employment or en
trance to any of our large
universities without exami
nation. I recall taking four
years of English, four years
of math, including algebra,
plane and solid geometry,
plane and spherical trigo
nometry, analytical geometry
and college algebra; four
years of shop—wood-turning,
forging and machine shop;
two years of art metal work,
physics, chemistry, electric
ity, drafting and German.
The girls' "shop-work” or vo
cational subjects included
art, domestic art and domes
tic science.
To make a fair comparison
of facilities provided in the
days of separate schools, one
must compare the facilities as
they then existed—not as
they now exist. If this be done,
it is the writer's belief that
the comparison will be less
Inequitable than pictured by
Mr. Henderson. Armstrong
High was also new and had
facilities equal to those of
money collected Is retained
by the Government to cover
most of the direct adminis
trative costs of dues collec
tions, the retained amount
will not cover the assign
able portion of the enormous
governmental Indirect or
overhead costs.
Oscar Stlegler.
I
Tribute to Hoover
What a pleasure it was to
read the column by Jim
Bishop on Herbert Hoover's
new book and illustrating
again the tremendous char
acter Mr. Hoover has. Mr.
Bishop’s column was one of
the most perfect tributes I
have ever seen to one of the
most perfect gentlemen it has
ever been my privilege to
know and one of the most
perfect statesmen ever to
shape the fate of the United
States and the world.
Albert W. Highsmith.
Returns Our Bow
Thank you on behalf of
all my colleagues on the
speech and drama depart
ment staff and for the Cath
olic University of America’s
academic family for your
gracious editorial, "In De
fense of Man.” Your encour
agement is sufficient to
energise us for another quar
ter century in the rww build
ing to come. God Bless you.
(Rev.) Gilbert V. Hartke, OP.
Dean, Speech and Drama De
partment, Catholic Univer
sity of America.
Tech. Dunbar, when built,
compared more than favor
ably with Western and
Business High Schools. This
writer lived just five blocks
from Dunbar, a number of
years before and after it was
built, but has no recollection
of the area being swamp
land. The closest approach
to what might be regarded
as swamp land in that area
was Gleason’s Pond in the
vicinity of North Capitol and
Bryant streets. It disap
peared when North Capitol
Street was extended beyond
T Street and the
plant built.
in making comparison be
tween high school life of my
time with that of the present
day, I feel that emphasis was
not on plant or facility but
on discipline. I use the word
in its fundamental meaning.
There was no problem of
vandalism, rowdyism or vio
lence such that a teacher had
to monitor the halls with a
night stick in his hand. Any
one entering the school went
Immediately to the princi
pal's office or was a tres
passer.
A casual observer recog
nizes that many of the D. C.
schools are Inadequate, as
they were in my time. Then,
as now, the Franklin School,
built circa 1878, housed the
administrative offices. But
of greater importance than
school facility is student at
titude. Techites also attended
classes “with dinning noise
permeating the class rooms
all day long." not to men
tion wagons trundling on the
cobblestones of Seventh
Street. But at least one of
them, like The Star’s edito
rial writer, looks rather fondly
on the old Tech of the first
decade.
Charles R Hodges.
Tech, ’lB
Frederick. Md.
•• • •
Old Techites. such as I. my
wife and four children hap
pen to be, read The Star's
nostalgic editorial defending
old Tech High School with
cheering pride. Whoever wrote
it was a true son of Tubal
Caln, the plebeian blacksmith
whose brooding image within
symbolic rack and gear graced
the bulletin board outside
Frank Daniel's office of the
principal. And in answering
Dr. E. B. Henderson's plain
tive letter, citing old McKin
ley Manual Training School
as a shabby, handed-down
relic, symbolic of segregated
education's disinheritance of
the former Negro slave, the
editorial writer must have re
called the legend on that old
bulletin board: Criticism is
easy but art is difficult
First Amendment
Robert Dilks In his letter
has clearly demonstrated
that James Madison, an au
thor of the Federal Bill of
Rights, regarded a system of
governmental chaplaincies as
inconsistent with the non
establishment provision of
the First Amendment (The
Star, April 4, 1963). How
ever, the authority and con
stitutional effect of that
amendment arose not from
Its introduction or sponsor
ship by Madison In the
House of Representatives,
but from its approval by two
thirds of the two Houses of
Congress and its subsequent
ratification by three-fourths
of the States. Therefore,
its controlling interpretation
should be sought less in the
individual views of Madison
(although they are entitled
to great respect) than in the
general intent and purpose
in regard to it on the part
of Congress and the people
of the United States as a
whole. If the First Con
gress, which initiated the
First Amendment, also sanc
tioned a system of govern
mental and military chap
laincies, and the public
acquiesced therein, this would
be strong evidence that the
general will and intent re
specting the religious clause
of the amendment differed
from Madison’s.
Kemp P. Yarborough.
St. Marys City, Md.
Yes, old Central and old
Tech High Schools were sep
arate but they were not equal.
Students of Central, located
on a beautiful hilltop, were
the aristocrats, with the city’s
only high school stadium. But
we, the blacksmiths, the ple
beian sons of the bourgeoisie,
never admitted Central’s su
periority in either brains or
brawn. Insofar as I know, old
Tech's graduates never in
cluded a personage of na
tional stature like Central's
distinguished alumnus, J.
Edgar Hoover, but like true
i sons and daughters of Tubal
Cain, we became solid citizens
of the working class. And we
learned criticism is easier
than art.
Dr. Henderson’s letter is
critical of the physical de
fects of Negro schools, hous
ing and playgrounds. He im
plies that if the separate
but-equal doctrine, ruled un
constitutional by our Su
preme Court, was uncompro
misingly enforced, the Negro
would overcome the ignominy
and injustice of his political
deprivation. This could be
true. But here again criticism
is easy and the art of the pos
sible is difficult. It is diffi
cult because in demanding
an end to the separate-but
equal doctrines of Recon
struction days, the aggressive
Negro leadership insists it is
politically possible and de
sirable to outlaw all racial
separateness. The Negro
leadership insists that any or
all racial separateness has
been outlawed. Perhaps It has,
but if so, this is one ruling of
the high court which is un
enforceable even with vigorous
prosecution and armed force.
Old Tech and old Central
symbolized a form of sepa
rateness in education that
never will die and the Su
preme Court never will over
rule. We received more than
education in old Tech and old
Central. They were more
than buildings, books and
teachers. They symbolized so
cial graces, preferences and
associations. There were cul
tural exchanges, participa
tions and competitions in
their very essence discrimi
nating. Enduring friendships
were made. I married mine.
But with the total Integration
the Negro leadership seems to
want there must be no racial
separateness. Everything as
sociated with education must
be totally integrated. As an
old and proud Techite I would
remind both Attorney Gen
eral Kennedy and Dr. Hen
derson of the Tech motto:
Criticism is easy but art is
difficult, especially the politi
cal art of the possible.
Thomas E. Mattingly. M.D.
WATCHING THE WORLD
By CROSBY S. NOYFS
The 'New' Nuclear Force
PARIS.
If they keep at it long
enough it seems possible that
the thinkers in the Kennedy
administration will come up
with a plan for a NATO
nuclear force so meaningless
as to be acceptable to every
one.
In fact this point has al
most been reached in the
wake of the visit to Europe
of Secretary of State Rusk
and Secretary of Defense
McNamara last week. To
judge from reports of this
effort, Americans are not
at all sure exactly what they
are proposing. And the
French are hopelessly con
fused about what, if any
thing, they are refusing.
It is clear enough, how
ever. that no one is very
happy about the “interallied’’
nuclear force now under dis
cussion in the NATO coun
cil.
At best it amounts to a still
more watered down version
of the original American
plan for a "multilateral”
mixed crew Polaris missile
fleet and British proposals
for a “multinational” force
made up of existing nuclear
arsenals.
A Preliminary Step
Americans, for their part,
are stressing the fact that
the present proposal is
merely a preliminary step
toward achievement of a
truly integrated NATO force.
Both Mr. Rusk and Mr. Mc-
Namara apparently made the
point that the United States
has by no means abandoned
its idea of a Polaris fleet
despite reactions of the Allies
that range from coolness to
flat rejection.
At the same time the Amer
icans have been arguing,
perhaps a little too glibly,
that the French are auto
matically part of an inter
allied force simply by virtue
of their contribution to
NATO’s military defenses.
Since two French fighter :
squadrons in Germany are
under NATO command and
would be equipped with Amer
ican nuclear bomba in case
of war, the French are "con
tributing” whether they admit
it or not.
By the same token West
Germany, Belgium, Italy, the
Netherlands and Canada also
“contribute” to the inter
allied force along with
Britain and the United States.
Now It’s Contribution
In short the nuclear weap
ons system which has existed
in Western Europe for years
under NATO command and '
American control is now
being hailed as a significant
new contribution to Western
security and allied unity.
Whatever sense or logic
there may be in this claim,
it is hard to see how the
interallied force will do any
thing to satisfy conflicting
preoccupations in Europe or
the United States in the field
of nuclear defense.
These preoccupations are
quite easy to define. On the
American side the major con
cern is over the spread of
nuclear weapons to other
countries—particularly West
Germany.
A BOOK FOR TODAY
By DONALD MINTZ
Tug-of-War Between Great Powers
NEGOTIATION FROM
STRENGTH. A Study in
the Politics of Power by
Coral Mary Bell. 248 pp.
(Alfred A. Knopf, $495.)
Slogans and brief phrases
of all sorts generally carry a
considerable number of un
articulated and sometimes
unperceived assumptions and
prejudices. If these phrases
are used as guides to policy—
that is, as something like
logical categories—they can
be misleading unless their en
tire content has at some time
been carefully examined and
made explicit.
Coral Bell, Lecturer in In
ternational Politics at the
University of Sydney, con
siders that the idea of nego
tiation from strength has not
been thus examined and “has
had, at least in the period
under review, the true mirage
like quality of some of the
most effective political myths:
shimmering promisingly, al
ways a little farther off.
across a stony waste of effort,
keeping its distance at each
apparent advance.”
Moreover, "the idea of
negotiation from strength
shares with that of the
balance of power (to which
it is closely related > an
element of built-in ambiguity
in that strength may imply
parity or tuperiortty, just as
balance may mean equili
brium (as of scales) or sur
plus (as of accounts).”
DR. BELL’S BOOK is his
torical and analytical rather
than prescriptive. The phrase
to which it is devoted became
prominent early in 1950 "in
consequence of certain
speeches by Dean Acheson
(then Secretary of State) and
Winston Churchill (then
Leader of the Opposition).”
Its rather checkered career
from this, point to the present
is traced with special atten
tion to the involvement of
both “negotiation" and
“strength" in the intricacies
of the domestic politics of the
various members of the West
ern alliance.
However much one may
study the turns In Western
and Soviet policy during the
postwar period, whatever
one may think of "negotia-
Quite obviously, the ideal
solution would be perpetua
tion of the existing setup
which amounts to an Ameri
can monopoly in the nuclear
field. But since this is
manifestly impossible, other
methods must be found to
bring national nuclear arma
ments under effective Ameri
can control.
European concern is over
the extent to which the
United States is committed—
and will stay committed—to
defend Europe with nuclear
weapons in case of a limited
attack. There is beyond any
doubt growing conviction that
Europe must provide for its
own nuclear force which
would be available regardless
of what the United States
might decide to do- in an
emergency.
This European feeling is
given its most vivid expres
sion in the policies of Presi
dent de Gaulle. France is
not only developing its own
atomic arsenal but also firm
ly refuses to cooperate with
any "interallied” scheme
which even by implication
imposes restraints and condi
tions on the use of its na
tional deterrent. Nor is
France entirely Isolated in
this stand. Whatever they
may say in the NATO coun
cil, the British and Germans
have considerable sympathy
and respect for the French
position.
Given this evident separa
tion of interests there are
predictable limitations to
what any "Interallied” force
can be expected to accom
plish.
Won’t Stop Spread
Most certainly it will not
prevent the spread of nu
clear weapons. The French
already have made it clear
that whatever happens they
will continue the develop
ment of their independent
deterrent. >
It will not satisfy major
European preoccupations over
their own security. The
transfer of American sub
marines and British V-bomb
ers to the NATO command
does not change the essen
tially national character of
these forces.
To rename a long existing
NATO tactical force as “in
terallied” does not remove
it from American control and
American command.
It will not in the long run
prevent collaboration between
the countries of Western
Europe to develop their own
nuclear arsenal. Such col
laboration seems Inevitable
whatever joint projects NATO
may evolve. It is motivated,
not by childish curiosity or
dreams of grandeur, but by
a growing sense of regional
unity and a very real concern
over security.
The best that an interallied
nuclear force can accomplish
is to provide a framework for
cooperation between existing
nuclear forces within the al
liance.
By bringing “contributing”
nations into consultation on
questions of nuclear strategy
and targeting, it promises to
give them a measure of so
phistication in areas where
they are still largely ignorant.
tion from strength,” one nag
ging question remains: What
was there that might have
been negotiable? Dr. Bell,
of course, asks the question
The reply is something less
than satisfying. '
“In a sense it will never
be possible to answer this
question categorically.” she
writes, “since it entails an
estimate of Intention, which
cannot tfe finally known:
Certainly not for Russia and
perhaps not even for the
Western powers, since there
were so many assorted and
disparate intentions involved
in the West.”
IN ANY CASE, she feels
“that time has proved mili
tarily to be against the West”
and that “the American
aspiration to negotiate from
strength came to nothing be
cause the compounded plu
ralism of decision-making
in an alliance of democra
cies vitiated the effort at
strength, and the chosen
concept of strength ruled out
the one promising issue for
negotiation.” This promising
issue is presumably the
status of a reunified Ger
many, but it is just at this
critical point that Dr. Bell’s
normally clear and well-or
ganized book suddenly turns
obscure.
She does not “contend that
settlement is now readily
possible, or even that it was
earlier. 'But.” she continues,
“in a period when the dan
gers attending diplomatic
negotiation have been con
stantly stressed, it may be
useful to point out that de
lay is not enough, that the
process of postponing settle
ment is a process of reduc
tion of choices . . . With all
due consciousness of the
dangers attending negotiated
settlement, one must ask
whether those attending set
tlement by default have not
proved as great.”
"Negotiation from
Strength" is essentially a
theoretical work. Dr. Bell
feels no obligation to make
precise practical proposals.
No one will deny the im
portance of theoretical study,
but most readers will never
theless wish that they had
been offered a few practical
suggestions.