NEHRU AND EISENHOWER
WHETHER or not Mr. Nehru's visit to Washington marks a high spot in the attempt by the US to woo the un- committed Afro-Asian States, it is certainly true that no one would have thought of a rapprochement between India and America some months ago. But now the shadows cast by Formosa and Viet Nam have been lost in the glare from the direction of Suez, and New Delhi and Washington have un- expectedly found themselves pulling in the same direction at the coat-tails of the British and French Governments.
However, as Mr. James Reston has remarked in the New York Times, less may come out of this meeting than was expected. Meetings at the summit have traditionally been surrounded by such a cloud of vague good will that they have tended to look like an advertisement for Paramount, but no amount of hand-shaking can conceal the fact that, on the basic problem of the world today, American and Indian points of view are wide apart. That basic problem is one of the future behaviour and evolution of the Soviet Union. For America Communism is a threat and the Soviet system of government morally corrupt. For India neither of these things is true, and the difference of interpretation could be seen at work over Hungary. China, indeed, may appear as a menace from New Delhi and Washington, but views on how to deal with possible Chinese expansion into South-East Asia differ. In the event of any move on the part of either Russia or China India and America would part company as to what to do about it, united though they might be on principles. The alarm that has been expressed by some Conservatives as to the possibility of America turning away from her Western allies in favour of the Bandung Powers is hardly justified. No permanent swop is possible, and the question would never have arisen if it had not been for our treatment of the Americans over Suez.
Previous page
