By LEE EDWARDS

The Truman Doctrine has been described in such apocalyptic tones by some writers that it is important to examine what President Truman said and did not say to that joint session of Congress some forty years ago.¹ He began by describing the military and political pressures being applied to Greece and Turkey by terrorists and communists, but he did not mention the Soviet Union. He explained that the British government could give no aid beyond 31 March 1947. He said that the assistance of the United Nations had been considered but that it was not in a position to extend the help required. He conceded that the Greek government was not perfect and stated that U.S. aid did not mean the condoning of extremism on the left or the right. Reaffirming U.S. support 'for the U.N.'s goals of freedom and independence for all its members, Truman insisted that these objectives would not be realized "unless we are willing to help free peoples to maintain their free institutions and their national integrity against aggressive movements that seek to impose upon them totalitarian regimes." And then he added the key sentence: "This is no more than a frank recognition that totalitarian regimes imposed on free peoples, by direct or indirect aggression, undermine the foundations of international peace and hence the security of the United States." This was the heart of the Truman Doctrine: international peace and U.S. security were linked. America assumed Great Britain's role as keeper of the peace not only in the Near East but around the world.

In response to the totalitarian threat, Truman said, the United States must respond firmly but "primarily" through economic assistance. Most critics of Truman and his "doctrine" either ignore or attempt to minimize this emphasis, but nevertheless it is there: "I believe that our help should be primarily through economic and financial aid which is essential to economic stability and' orderly political processes." The other key tenets were:

I believe that it must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures.

I believe that we must assist free peoples to work out their own destinies in their own way.

Truman emphasized the seriousness of the crisis in the Near East, stating that the fall of Greece and Turkey would cause "confusion and disorder" in the entire Middle East and would have a "profound effect" upon Europe. He therefore asked Congress for $400 million in aid to Greece and Turkey, arguing that "the free peoples of the world" looked to the United States to help them maintain their freedom. "If we falter," said the president, "we may endanger the peace of the world -- and we shall surely endanger the welfare of our own nation."²

The president received a standing ovation from Democrats and Republicans, but as Acheson comments, "this was a tribute to a brave man rather than unanimous acceptance of his policy."³ Opponents sprang to the attack, sensing the epochal nature of the measure. Senator Harry Byrd (D-Va.) questioned the amount of money that would be involved in implementing the Truman Doctrine all over the world as well as the wisdom of bypassing the United Nations. Democratic Senators Pepper of Florida and Allen Ellender of Louisiana both criticized the president's proposal for being warlike and going around the United Nations. Other critics who warned that Greek-Turkish aid

-131-