70 Year Magazine Archive

Hamiltonian Schizophrenia

by F. R. Buckley

Share this story

British, the French and the Egyptians have resulted in a “disastrous breakdown in world order and almost certainly a new world war waged with nuclear weapons,” as Mr. Beal supposes? Since Nasser had no atomic weapons, and since the Israeli army had already beaten the Egyptians, it is hard to see how this could have happened. This is quite aside from the question of Anglo-French ability to carry through what they started when they moved on Suez: maybe Eisenhower and Dulles did the British and the French a good turn in ending the war before their feebleness had become apparent to the world. But Mr. Beal does not justify the Eisenhower-Dulles interference on any such practical ground.

He sticks to the point that the Administration was right in saying that “we do not accept the use of force as a wise or proper instrument for the settlement of international disputes.” And this in the face of Dulles’ own remarks on “brinkmanship,” which may be defined as the successful deployment of deterrent power.

Comments

Advertisement

Advertisement