Basic HTML Version
PASTOR GENERAL'S REPORT, DECEMBER 16, 1983
PAGE 9
with the United States. The Americans could not be expected to
continue to shoulder the main burden of West European defense
against the Soviet Union if Western Europe refused to share its
burdens in containing Soviet advances in the rest of the
world...•
Not that I personally would wish to see that choice made, since I
have absolutely no faith in Britain and Western Europe possessing
that minimum of prudent and resolute statesmanship which a sepa
rate relationship with the Soviet Union would require. Without
the American backbone, the European body politic would in no time
start flopping all over the place. But that suspicion apart, one
has to admit that� separate relationship with the Soviet Union
and a less close one with the United States are no longer options
which only fellow-travellers on the Left could be expected to
espouse••••
The new choices are, in essence, between joining the United
States in its global competition with the Soviet Union, or
evolving� relationship with the Soviet Union which would allow
Britain and Western Europe a quiet life on the sidelines of the
international struggle.
Neither course seems to me self
evidently more sensible or honorable than the other. Of course
Britain and Western Europe are on America's side morally. But
such is their timidity in practice that the United States might
very well be more effective on its own, particularly if the
military burdens of defending Western Europe were gradually
lifted from its shoulders, as they would be if Western Europe
reached an understanding with the Soviet Union.
In other words, such an understanding might strengthen, rather
than weaken, the United States in its struggle against Communism
in those parts of the world where the threat is still acute, as it
no longer is in Western Europe. It is no longer necessarily true
that we need the Americans or that they need us. The common in
terest might best be served .QY an early divorce, while relations
are still close enough for the terms to be amicably agreed.
Europe indeed is in a state of political flux. But worries over the future
are not limited to the western half of the continent. In Eastern Europe,
the Soviet satellites do not appreciate the threats emanating from Moscow
to move Soviet missiles further westward in order to counter the Pershing
II/cruise missile deployments. They have displayed surprising outspoken
ness in their criticisms. Here is a report on this from the November 29,
1983 WALL STREET JOURNAL.
Public statements from East Germany, Czechoslovakia and Romania
echoed Moscow's condemnation of the U.S. for new nuclear missile
deployments that began last week in Western Europe. But the
statements expressed reluctance about Soviet plans for counter
deployments in East Germany and Czechoslovakia and stressed the
need for continued dialogue with the West.
Just yesterday [Nov. 28 ], West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl
disclosed that East Germany has made quiet inquiries about finan
cial assistance from Bonn despite frequent Soviet threats to