Article
· book: walter lippmann and the american century
· politics
Walter Lippmann and the American Century — 34 Swimming up Niagara
- 1. George Kennan's 1946 'long telegram' argued that Soviet policy was governed by communist ideology, not security interests, making diplomatic settlement impossible.
- 2. Lippmann criticized the Baruch Plan for atomic energy control, arguing the veto issue was overblown and the plan would harden American opinion on unrealistic ideas.
- 3. Lippmann opposed Byrnes's Stuttgart speech promising Germans return of lost territories and a strong central government, calling it a promise only Russia could deliver.
- 4. Lippmann saw the Henry Wallace episode as evidence of Truman administration ineptitude, with no one controlling policy.
- 5. Lippmann advised Forrestal that Stalin's 1946 offer to cut Soviet ground forces in exchange for US atomic disarmament was a trap, as the US would lose its strongest weapon while Russia could quickly remobilize.
- 6. Lippmann dismissed disarmament schemes as absurd, arguing the nuclear balance of terror, not international authorities, prevented war.
- 7. Lippmann argued the Soviets were essentially defensive, not ideological fanatics, and that Western policy had given them pretexts for iron rule behind the Iron Curtain.
- 8. Lippmann supported the Greek-Turkish aid bill but condemned the Truman Doctrine's sweeping rhetoric as an unlimited ideological crusade.
- 9. Lippmann argued that intervention in the name of balance of power was justified, but indiscriminate support for unstable client regimes was wasteful and dangerous.
- 10. Lippmann's column 'Cassandra Speaking' proposed a massive European aid program akin to Lend-Lease, which became the blueprint for the Marshall Plan.
- 11. Lippmann and Kennan agreed the Soviets should be invited to participate in the Marshall Plan, but Stalin refused, seeing it as an attempt to reverse Yalta.
- 12. Lippmann's series of columns refuting Kennan's 'X' article coined the term 'Cold War' and attacked containment as a 'strategic monstrosity' that would require endless intervention.