THE WEEK

We have written a great deal about the merits of the case. We have explored Egypt’s claims against Israel, Israel’s against the Arabs, the world’s against Egypt and Israel, the Suez Canal Company’s against Nasser: but at this moment we look not at all at the merits of the case. It is simply a fact that the tiny state of Israel, an exiguous little enclave in a hostile world, has defied and successfully defied the Soviet Union, the Arab World, the United Nations, and the United States. How? By identifying the national interest—and settling for nothing less. It is an ancient formula. But it is not—and here is the lesson for Mr. Eisenhower—an anachronistic one.

When President Eisenhower suffered his two attacks, stock prices tumbled, a phenomenon that encouraged an identification of the President’s health with the health of the economy. The President’s budget is undermining that assumption. At a recent meeting of the National Association of Manufacturers, the board of directors met the challenge “What Would You Cut Out?” by saying just what they would cut out, and it totaled eight billion. In a letter to one thousand Chambers throughout the land, the president of the New York State Chamber of Commerce predicted that the proposed budget would give the welfare state its “greatest impetus” since the war, and characterized aid to education as “one of the most dangerous federal projects in our lifetime.” If the President doesn’t watch out, the stock market will exhibit a cold indifference to White House medical reports.

Featured Tags

We have written a great deal about the merits of the case. We have explored Egypt’s claims against Israel, Israel’s against the Arabs, the world’s against Egypt and Israel, the Suez Canal Company’s against Nasser: but at this moment we look not at all at the merits of the case. It is simply a fact that the tiny state of Israel, an exiguous little enclave in a hostile world, has defied and successfully defied the Soviet Union, the Arab World, the United Nations, and the United States. How? By identifying the national interest—and settling for nothing less. It is an ancient formula. But it is not—and here is the lesson for Mr. Eisenhower—an anachronistic one.

When President Eisenhower suffered his two attacks, stock prices tumbled, a phenomenon that encouraged an identification of the President’s health with the health of the economy. The President’s budget is undermining that assumption. At a recent meeting of the National Association of Manufacturers, the board of directors met the challenge “What Would You Cut Out?” by saying just what they would cut out, and it totaled eight billion. In a letter to one thousand Chambers throughout the land, the president of the New York State Chamber of Commerce predicted that the proposed budget would give the welfare state its “greatest impetus” since the war, and characterized aid to education as “one of the most dangerous federal projects in our lifetime.” If the President doesn’t watch out, the stock market will exhibit a cold indifference to White House medical reports.