It
is also an honour, perhaps almost unique, for a private visitor to be
introduced to an academic audience by the President of the United States. Amid
his heavy burdens, duties, and responsibilities - unsought but not recoiled
from - the President has travelled a thousand miles to dignify and magnify our
meeting here to-day and to give me an opportunity of addressing this kindred
nation, as well as my own countrymen across the ocean, and perhaps some other
countries too. The President has told you that it is his wish, as I am sure it
is yours, that I should have full liberty to give my true and faithful counsel
in these anxious and baffling times.
I
shall certainly avail myself of this freedom, and feel the more right to do so
because any private ambitions I may have cherished in my younger days have been
satisfied beyond my wildest dreams. Let me, however, make it clear that I have
no official mission or status of any kind, and that I speak only for myself.
There is nothing here but what you see.
I
can therefore allow my mind, with the experience of a lifetime, to play over
the problems which beset us on the morrow of our absolute victory in arms, and
to try to make sure with what strength I have that what has been gained with so
much sacrifice and suffering shall be preserved for the future glory and safety
of mankind.
The
United States stands at this time at the pinnacle of world power. It is a
solemn moment for the American Democracy. For with primacy in power is also
joined an awe-inspiring accountability to the future. If you look around you,
you must feel not only the sense of duty done but also you must feel anxiety
lest you fall below the level of achievement. Opportunity is here now, clear
and shining for both our countries. To reject it or ignore it or fritter it
away will bring upon us all the long reproaches of the after-time. It is
necessary that constancy of mind, persistency of purpose, and the grand
simplicity of decision shall guide and rule the conduct of the English-speaking
peoples in peace as they did in war. We must, and I believe we shall, prove
ourselves equal to this severe requirement.
When
American military men approach some serious situation they are wont to write at
the head of their directive the words "over-all strategic concept."
There is wisdom in this, as it leads to clarity of thought. What then is the
over-all strategic concept which we should inscribe today? It is nothing less
than the safety and welfare, the freedom and progress, of all the homes and
families of all the men and women in all the lands. And here I speak
particularly of the myriad cottage or apartment homes where the wage-earner
strives amid the accidents and difficulties of life to guard his wife and
children from privation and bring the family up in the fear of the Lord, or
upon ethical conceptions which often play their potent part.
To
give security to these countless homes, they must be shielded from the two
giant marauders, war and tyranny. We all know the frightful disturbances in
which the ordinary family is plunged when the curse of war swoops down upon the
bread-winner and those for whom he works and contrives. The awful ruin of
Europe, with all its vanished glories, and of large parts of Asia glares us in
the eyes. When the designs of wicked men or the aggressive urge of mighty
States dissolve over large areas the frame of civilised society, humble folk
are confronted with difficulties with which they cannot cope. For them all is
distorted, all is broken, even ground to pulp.
When
I stand here this quiet afternoon I shudder to visualise what is actually
happening to millions now and what is going to happen in this period when
famine stalks the earth. None can compute what has been called "the
unestimated sum of human pain." Our supreme task and duty is to guard the
homes of the common people from the horrors and miseries of another war. We are
all agreed on that.
Our
American military colleagues, after having proclaimed their "over-all
strategic concept" and computed available resources, always proceed to the
next step - namely, the method. Here again there is widespread agreement. A
world organisation has already been erected for the prime purpose of preventing
war, UNO, the successor of the League of Nations,
with the decisive addition of the United States and all that that means, is
already at work. We must make sure that its work is fruitful, that it is a
reality and not a sham, that it is a force for action, and not merely a
frothing of words, that it is a true temple of peace in which the shields of
many nations can some day be hung up, and not merely a cockpit in a Tower of Babel.
Before we cast away the solid assurances of national armaments for
self-preservation we must be certain that our temple is built, not upon
shifting sands or quagmires, but upon the rock. Anyone can see with his eyes
open that our path will be difficult and also long, but if we persevere
together as we did in the two world wars - though not, alas, in the interval
between them - I cannot doubt that we shall achieve our common purpose in the
end.
I
have, however, a definite and practical proposal to make for action. Courts and
magistrates may be set up but they cannot function without sheriffs and
constables. The United Nations Organisation must immediately begin to be
equipped with an international armed force. In such a matter we can only go
step by step, but we must begin now. I propose that each of the Powers and
States should be invited to delegate a certain number of air squadrons to the
service of the world organisation.
These squadrons would be trained and
prepared in their own countries, but would move around in rotation from one
country to another. They would wear the uniform of their own countries but with
different badges. They would not be required to act against their own nation,
but in other respects they would be directed by the world organisation. This
might be started on a modest scale and would grow as confidence grew. I wished
to see this done after the first world war, and I devoutly trust it may be
done forthwith.
It
would nevertheless be wrong and imprudent to entrust the secret knowledge or
experience of the atomic bomb, which the United States, Great Britain, and
Canada now share, to the world organisation, while it is still in its infancy.
It would be criminal madness to cast it adrift in this still agitated and
un-united world. No one in any country has slept less well in their beds
because this knowledge and the method and the raw materials to apply it, are at
present largely retained in American hands. I do not believe we should all have
slept so soundly had the positions been reversed and if some Communist or
neo-Fascist State monopolised for the time being these dread agencies.
The fear
of them alone might easily have been used to enforce totalitarian systems upon
the free democratic world, with consequences appalling to human imagination.
God has willed that this shall not be and we have at least a breathing space to
set our house in order before this peril has to be encountered: and even then,
if no effort is spared, we should still possess so formidable a superiority as
to impose effective deterrents upon its employment, or threat of employment, by
others. Ultimately, when the essential brotherhood of man is truly embodied and
expressed in a world organisation with all the necessary practical safeguards
to make it effective, these powers would naturally be confided to that world
organisation.
Now
I come to the second danger of these two marauders which threatens the cottage,
the home, and the ordinary people - namely, tyranny. We cannot be blind to the
fact that the liberties enjoyed by individual citizens throughout the British
Empire are not valid in a considerable number of countries, some of which are
very powerful. In these States control is enforced upon the common people by
various kinds of all-embracing police governments.
The power of the State is
exercised without restraint, either by dictators or by compact oligarchies operating
through a privileged party and a political police. It is not our duty at this
time when difficulties are so numerous to interfere forcibly in the internal
affairs of countries which we have not conquered in war. But we must never
cease to proclaim in fearless tones the great principles of freedom and the
rights of man which are the joint inheritance of the English-speaking world and
which through Magna Carta,
the Bill of Rights, the Habeas Corpus,
trial by jury, and the English common law find their
most famous expression in the American Declaration of Independence.
All
this means that the people of any country have the right, and should have the
power by constitutional action, by free unfettered elections, with secret
ballot, to choose or change the character or form of government under which
they dwell; that freedom of speech and thought should reign; that courts of
justice, independent of the executive, unbiased by any party, should administer
laws which have received the broad assent of large majorities or are
consecrated by time and custom. Here are the title deeds of freedom which
should lie in every cottage home. Here is the message of the British and
American peoples to mankind. Let us preach what we practise - let us practise
what we preach.
I
have now stated the two great dangers which menace the homes of the people: War
and Tyranny. I have not yet spoken of poverty and privation which are in many
cases the prevailing anxiety. But if the dangers of war and tyranny are
removed, there is no doubt that science and co-operation can bring in the next
few years to the world, certainly in the next few decades newly taught in the
sharpening school of war, an expansion of material well-being beyond anything
that has yet occurred in human experience.
Now, at this sad and breathless
moment, we are plunged in the hunger and distress which are the aftermath of
our stupendous struggle; but this will pass and may pass quickly, and there is
no reason except human folly of sub-human crime which should deny to all the
nations the inauguration and enjoyment of an age of plenty. I have often used
words which I learned fifty years ago from a great Irish-American orator, a
friend of mine, Mr. Bourke Cockran. "There
is enough for all. The earth is a generous mother; she will provide in
plentiful abundance food for all her children if they will but cultivate her
soil in justice and in peace." So far I feel that we are in full
agreement.
Now, while still pursuing the method
of realising our overall strategic concept, I come to the crux of what I have
travelled here to say. Neither the sure prevention of war, nor the continuous
rise of world organisation will be gained without what I have called the
fraternal association of the English-speaking peoples. This means a special
relationship between the British Commonwealth and Empire and the United States.
This is no time for generalities, and I will venture to be precise. Fraternal
association requires not only the growing friendship and mutual understanding
between our two vast but kindred systems of society, but the continuance of the
intimate relationship between our military advisers, leading to common study of
potential dangers, the similarity of weapons and manuals of instructions, and
to the interchange of officers and cadets at technical colleges. It should
carry with it the continuance of the present facilities for mutual security by
the joint use of all Naval and Air Force bases in the possession of either country
all over the world.
This would perhaps double the mobility of the American Navy
and Air Force. It would greatly expand that of the British Empire Forces and it
might well lead, if and as the world calms down, to important financial
savings. Already we use together a large number of islands; more may well be
entrusted to our joint care in the near future.
The United States has already a
Permanent Defence Agreement with the Dominion of Canada, which is so devotedly
attached to the British
Commonwealth and Empire. This Agreement is more effective than many
of those which have often been made under formal alliances. This principle
should be extended to all British Commonwealths with full reciprocity. Thus,
whatever happens, and thus only, shall we be secure ourselves and able to work
together for the high and simple causes that are dear to us and bode no ill to
any. Eventually there may come - I feel eventually there will come - the
principle of common citizenship, but that we may be content to leave to
destiny, whose outstretched arm many of us can already clearly see.
There is however an important question
we must ask ourselves. Would a special relationship between the United States
and the British Commonwealth be inconsistent with our over-riding loyalties to
the World Organisation? I reply that, on the contrary, it is probably the only
means by which that organisation will achieve its full stature and strength.
There are already the special United States relations with Canada which I have
just mentioned, and there are the special relations between the United States
and the South American Republics. We British have our twenty years Treaty of
Collaboration and Mutual Assistance with Soviet Russia. I agree with Mr. Bevin,
the Foreign Secretary of Great Britain, that it might well be a fifty years
Treaty so far as we are concerned.
We aim at nothing but mutual assistance and
collaboration. The British have an alliance with Portugal unbroken since 1384,
and which produced fruitful results at critical moments in the late war. None
of these clash with the general interest of a world agreement, or a world
organisation; on the contrary they help it. "In my father's house are many
mansions." Special associations between members of the United
Nations which
have no aggressive point against any other country, which harbour no design
incompatible with the Charter of the United Nations, far from being harmful,
are beneficial and, as I believe, indispensable.
I spoke earlier of the Temple of
Peace. Workmen from all countries must build that temple. If two of the workmen
know each other particularly well and are old friends, if their families are
inter-mingled, and if they have "faith in each other's purpose, hope in
each other's future and charity towards each other's shortcomings" - to
quote some good words I read here the other day - why cannot they work together
at the common task as friends and partners? Why cannot they share their tools
and thus increase each other's working powers? Indeed they must do so or else
the temple may not be built, or, being built, it may collapse, and we shall all
be proved again unteachable and have to go and try to learn again for a third
time in a school of war, incomparably more rigorous than that from which we
have just been released.
The dark ages may return, the Stone Age may return on
the gleaming wings of science, and what might now shower immeasurable material
blessings upon mankind, may even bring about its total destruction.
Beware, I
say; time may be short. Do not let us take the course of allowing events to
drift along until it is too late. If there is to be a fraternal association of
the kind I have described, with all the extra strength and security which both
our countries can derive from it, let us make sure that that great fact is
known to the world, and that it plays its part in steadying and stabilising the
foundations of peace. There is the path of wisdom. Prevention is better than
cure.
A shadow has fallen upon the scenes so
lately lighted by the Allied victory. Nobody knows what Soviet Russia and its
Communist international organisation intends to do in the immediate future, or
what are the limits, if any, to their expansive and proselytising tendencies. I
have a strong admiration and regard for the valiant Russian people and for my
wartime comrade, Marshal Stalin.
There is deep sympathy and goodwill in Britain
- and I doubt not here also - towards the peoples of all the Russias and a
resolve to persevere through many differences and rebuffs in establishing
lasting friendships. We understand the Russian need to be secure on her western
frontiers by the removal of all possibility of German aggression. We welcome
Russia to her rightful place among the leading nations of the world. We welcome
her flag upon the seas.
Above all, we welcome constant, frequent and growing
contacts between the Russian people and our own people on both sides of the
Atlantic. It is my duty however, for I am sure you would wish me to state the
facts as I see them to you, to place before you certain facts about the present
position in Europe.
From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste
in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across the Continent. Behind
that line lie all the capitals of the ancient states of Central and Eastern
Europe. Warsaw, Berlin, Prague, Vienna, Budapest, Belgrade, Bucharest and
Sofia, all these famous cities and the populations around them lie in what I
must call the Soviet sphere, and all are subject in one form or another, not
only to Soviet influence but to a very high and, in many cases, increasing
measure of control from Moscow. Athens alone - Greece with its immortal glories
- is free to decide its future at an election under British, American and
French observation.
The Russian-dominated Polish Government has been encouraged
to make enormous and wrongful inroads upon Germany, and mass expulsions of
millions of Germans on a scale grievous and undreamed-of are now taking place.
The Communist parties, which were very small in all these Eastern States of
Europe, have been raised to pre-eminence and power far beyond their numbers and
are seeking everywhere to obtain totalitarian
control. Police governments are prevailing in nearly every case, and
so far, except in Czechoslovakia, there is no true democracy.
Turkey and Persia are both profoundly
alarmed and disturbed at the claims which are being made upon them and at the
pressure being exerted by the Moscow Government. An attempt is being made by
the Russians in Berlin to build up a quasi-Communist party in their zone of
Occupied Germany by showing special favours to groups of left-wing German
leaders. At the end of the fighting last June, the American and British Armies
withdrew westwards, in accordance with an earlier agreement, to a depth at some
points of 150 miles upon a front of nearly four hundred miles, in order to
allow our Russian allies to occupy this vast expanse of territory which the
Western Democracies had conquered.
If now the Soviet Government tries, by
separate action, to build up a pro-Communist Germany in their areas, this will
cause new serious difficulties in the British and American zones, and will give
the defeated Germans the power of putting themselves up to auction between the
Soviets and the Western Democracies. Whatever conclusions may be drawn from
these facts - and facts they are - this is certainly not the Liberated Europe
we fought to build up. Nor is it one which contains the essentials of permanent
peace.
The safety of the world requires a new
unity in Europe, from which no nation should be permanently outcast. It is from
the quarrels of the strong parent races in Europe that the world wars we have
witnessed, or which occurred in former times, have sprung. Twice in our own
lifetime we have seen the United States, against their wishes and their
traditions, against arguments, the force of which it is impossible not to
comprehend, drawn by irresistible forces, into these wars in time to secure the
victory of the good cause, but only after frightful slaughter and devastation
had occurred.
Twice the United States has had to send several millions of its
young men across the Atlantic to find the war; but now war can find any nation,
wherever it may dwell between dusk and dawn. Surely we should work with
conscious purpose for a grand pacification of Europe, within the structure of
the United Nations and in accordance with its Charter. That I feel is an open
cause of policy of very great importance.
In front of the iron curtain which
lies across Europe are other causes for anxiety. In Italy the Communist Party
is seriously hampered by having to support the Communist-trained Marshal Tito's
claims to former Italian territory at the head of the Adriatic. Nevertheless
the future of Italy hangs in the balance. Again one cannot imagine a
regenerated Europe without a strong France.
All my public life I have worked
for a strong France and I never lost faith in her destiny, even in the darkest
hours. I will not lose faith now. However, in a great number of countries, far
from the Russian frontiers and throughout the world, Communist fifth columns
are established and work in complete unity and absolute obedience to the
directions they receive from the Communist centre.
Except in the British
Commonwealth and in the United States where Communism is in its infancy, the
Communist parties or fifth columns constitute a growing challenge and peril to
Christian civilisation. These are sombre facts for anyone to have to recite on
the morrow of a victory gained by so much splendid comradeship in arms and in
the cause of freedom and democracy; but we should be most unwise not to face
them squarely while time remains.
The outlook is also anxious in the Far
East and especially in Manchuria. The Agreement which was made at Yalta, to
which I was a party, was extremely favourable to Soviet Russia, but it was made
at a time when no one could say that the German war might not extend all
through the summer and autumn of 1945 and when the Japanese war was expected to
last for a further 18 months from the end of the German war. In this country
you are all so well-informed about the Far East, and such devoted friends of
China, that I do not need to expatiate on the situation there.
I have felt bound to portray the
shadow which, alike in the west and in the east, falls upon the world. I was a
high minister at the time of the Versailles
Treaty and
a close friend of Mr. Lloyd-George, who was the head of the British delegation
at Versailles. I did not myself agree with many things that were done, but I
have a very strong impression in my mind of that situation, and I find it
painful to contrast it with that which prevails now. In those days there were
high hopes and unbounded confidence that the wars were over, and that the League
of Nations would become all-powerful. I do not see or feel that same confidence
or even the same hopes in the haggard world at the present time.
On the other hand I repulse the idea
that a new war is inevitable; still more that it is imminent. It is because I
am sure that our fortunes are still in our own hands and that we hold the power
to save the future, that I feel the duty to speak out now that I have the
occasion and the opportunity to do so.
I do not believe that Soviet Russia
desires war. What they desire is the fruits of war and the indefinite expansion
of their power and doctrines. But what we have to consider here to-day while
time remains, is the permanent prevention of war and the establishment of
conditions of freedom and democracy as rapidly as possible in all countries.
Our difficulties and dangers will not be removed by closing our eyes to them.
They will not be removed by mere waiting to see what happens; nor will they be
removed by a policy of appeasement. What is needed is a settlement, and the
longer this is delayed, the more difficult it will be and the greater our
dangers will become.
From what I have seen of our Russian
friends and Allies during the war, I am convinced that there is nothing they
admire so much as strength, and there is nothing for which they have less
respect than for weakness, especially military weakness. For that reason the
old doctrine of a balance of power is unsound. We cannot afford, if we can help
it, to work on narrow margins, offering temptations to a trial of strength. If
the Western Democracies stand together in strict adherence to the principles of
the United Nations Charter, their influence for furthering those principles
will be immense and no one is likely to molest them. If however they become
divided or falter in their duty and if these all-important years are allowed to
slip away then indeed catastrophe may overwhelm us all.
Last time I saw it all coming and
cried aloud to my own fellow-countrymen and to the world, but no one paid any
attention. Up till the year 1933 or even 1935, Germany might have been saved
from the awful fate which has overtaken her and we might all have been spared
the miseries Hitler let loose upon mankind. There never was a war in all
history easier to prevent by timely action than the one which has just
desolated such great areas of the globe. It could have been prevented in my
belief without the firing of a single shot, and Germany might be powerful,
prosperous and honoured to-day; but no one would listen and one by one we were
all sucked into the awful whirlpool.
We surely must not let that happen again.
This can only be achieved by reaching now, in 1946, a good understanding on all
points with Russia under the general authority of the United Nations
Organisation and by the maintenance of that good understanding through many
peaceful years, by the world instrument, supported by the whole strength of the
English-speaking world and all its connections. There is the solution which I
respectfully offer to you in this Address to which I have given the title
"The Sinews of Peace."
Let no man underrate the abiding power
of the British
Empire and
Commonwealth. Because you see the 46 millions in our island harassed about
their food supply, of which they only grow one half, even in war-time, or
because we have difficulty in restarting our industries and export trade after
six years of passionate war effort, do not suppose that we shall not come through
these dark years of privation as we have come through the glorious years of
agony, or that half a century from now, you will not see 70 or 80 millions of
Britons spread about the world and united in defence of our traditions, our way
of life, and of the world causes which you and we espouse.
If the population of
the English-speaking Commonwealths be added to that of the United States with
all that such co-operation implies in the air, on the sea, all over the globe
and in science and in industry, and in moral force, there will be no quivering,
precarious balance of power to offer its temptation to ambition or adventure.
On the contrary, there will be an overwhelming assurance of security. If we
adhere faithfully to the Charter of the United Nations and walk forward in
sedate and sober strength seeking no one's land or treasure, seeking to lay no
arbitrary control upon the thoughts of men; if all British moral and material
forces and convictions are joined with your own in fraternal association, the
high-roads of the future will be clear, not only for us but for all, not only
for our time, but for a century to come.
* The text of Sir Winston Churchill's
"The Sinews of Peace" speech is quoted in its entirety from Robert
Rhodes James (ed.), Winston S. Churchill: His
Complete Speeches 1897-1963 Volume VII: 1943-1949 (New York: Chelsea
House Publishers, 1974) 7285-7293.
Original
Original
No comments:
Post a Comment