The Politics of World Federation 0275980669, 9780275980665

Volume I traces the influence of a generation of internationalists on policy, particularly on Winston Churchill's p

356 25 26MB

English Pages 700 [746] Year 2004

Report DMCA / Copyright


Table of contents :
Introduction to Both Volumes
Volume 1
1. Precursors from Dante to Wilson
2. Clarence Streit: Federal Union of Democracies
3. Winston Churchill's Offer of Anglo-French Union
4. State Department Planning for the United Nations Organization
5. World Federalists' Response to the United Nations
6. A New Age: Hiroshima and Nagasaki
7. The Atomic Scientists' Movement
8. Grenville Gark: U.N. Reform
9. Henry Usbome: The Peoples' Convention
10. The Baruch Plan for the International Control of Atomic Energy
11. U.N. Reform as the Baruch Plan Foiled
12. Formation of United World Federalists (UWF)
13. The Truman Doctrine: Containment
Conclusion to Volume i
Appendix A. Abbreviations and Acronyms
Appendix B. Historic Federal Unions
Appendix C. Clauses in National Constitutions Limiting Sovereignty
Appendix D. Archives and Collections
Appendix E. Interviews
Index to Volume 1
Volume 2
Introduction to Volume 2
14. Albert Einstein on World Government
15. Robert M. Hutchins: Framing a World Constitution
16. The Crusade and the World Movement
17. Cord Meyer: Mainstream World Federalism
18. The Foundation for World Government
19. Garry Davis: World Citizen in France
20. Henry Wallace's Challenge in the Election of 1948
21. What about Russia?
22. World Federalism in the States
23. Climax of U.S. House and Senate Hearings
24. The Korean War and the Decline of the Federalist Movement
25. World Federalists in the Cold War
Conclusion to Both Volumes: Global Governance
Appendix F. World Federalist Declarations
Appendix G. State Resolutions
Appendix H. U.S. Congressional Resolutions
Appendix I. Federalist Journals
Appendix J. Annotated Bibliography
Index to Volume 2
Recommend Papers

The Politics of World Federation
 0275980669, 9780275980665

  • 0 0 0
  • Like this paper and download? You can publish your own PDF file online for free in a few minutes! Sign Up
File loading please wait...
Citation preview

T he P olitics of W orld Federation

T he P olitics of W orld Federation United Nations , UN Reform, Atomic Control J oseph P reston b a r a t t a


Westport, Connecticut London

L ib rary o f C o o p ta Cataloglng>İt>oPublicatloıı D ata Baratta, Joseph Preston. The politics o f world federation / Joseph Preston Baratta, p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. Contents: v. 1. United Nations, UN reform, atomic control—v. 2. From world federalism to global governance. ISBN 0-275-98066-9 (set: alk. paper)—0-275-98067-7 (v. 1: alk. paper)— 0-275-98068-5 (v. 2: alk. paper) 1. International organization. I. Title. JZ5566.B37 2004 341.2—dc21 2003046304 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data is available. Copyright C 2004 by Joseph Preston Baratta All rights reserved. No portion o f this book may be reproduced, by any process or technique, without the express written consent o f the publisher. Library o f Congress Catalog Card Number 2003046304 ISBN: 0-275-98066-9 (Set) 0-275-98067-7 [Vol. I] 0-275-98068-5 [Vol. II] First published in 2004 Praeger Publishers, 88 Post Road W est, W estport, CT 06881 An imprint o f Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc. Printed in the United States o f America

er The paper used in this book complies with the Permanent Paper Standard issued by the National Information Standards Organization (Z39.48-1984). 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

Copyright Acknowledgments The author and publisher gratefully acknowledge use excerpts from: Imagine. Words and Music by John Lennon. © 197! (Renewed 1999) LENONO.MUSIC. AU rights controlled and administered by EMI BLACKWOOD MUSIC INC. AU rights reserved. International copyright secured. Used by permission. The People, Yes, by Carl Sandburg, copyright 1936 by Harcourt, Inc. and renewed 1964 by Carl Sandburg, reprinted by permission of the pubUsher.

In memory o f my sister, Mary Florence Baratta (1944-1978), educator, environmentalist, friend


There are a great many more believers in the one-world ideal in die W est to­ day than there were Bolsheviks in Russia at the time o f the October [1917] revo­ lution, or Christians in the Roman empire at the time of Constantine’s conver­ sion. Something holds them bade. Is it the M id-W eston isolationists in the United States? The surviving nationalism of Europe? Stalin? The iron curtain? Then w hat about the darkness o f the pre-revolutionary Russian muzjik, what about Nero, what about the lions? Clearly, what holds us back, what prevents our idealism s fro n bong effec­ tive, is that we do not have the personalities o f Bolsheviks or of early Christians. ... The trouble is that we do not believe in soul-force in the modem W est In­ stead we believe in the magic power o f ideas, which is considerably less scienti­ fic than believing in soul-force.... W e believe it is leadership to tell other na­ tions that we w ill disarm if they do, that we w ill stop calling nam es if they stop, that if all other nations want to do away with the veto they will not find us blocking the way. We believe that we can order one world by m ail and have it come wrapped in cellophane. That is why our peace personalities are less developed than our intellects, or our war personalities. That is why we cannot convert a Soviet commissar and why we find it so difficult to convert a Kansas farmer. That is why reason and right seem so unavailing against the powers of darkness. —Edmund Taylor, 1947 Richer by Asia (1947), pp. 4 0 8 ,4 1 7 ,4 1 8 . Common Cause, 4 (August 1950).

Contents V o l. 1: The United Na tions, U.N. Reform, Atom ic Control

Preface Foreword by John Anderson

ix xi

Introduction to Both Volumes 1. Precursors from Dante to W ilson 2. Clarence Streit: Federal Union of Democracies 3. W inston Churchill’s Offer of Anglo-French Union 4. U.S. State Department Planning for the United Nations Organization 5. W orld Federalists’ Response to the U N . 6. A New Age: Hiroshima and Nagasaki Illustrations 7. The Atomic Scientists’ M ovement 8. Grenville Clark: U.N. Reform 9. Henry Usbome: The Peoples’ Convention 10. The Baruch Plan for the International Control of Atomic Energy 11. U.N. Reform as the Baruch Plan Failed 12. Formation o f United W orld Federalists (UWF) 13. The Truman Doctrine: Containment Conclusion to Volume 1

1 27 49 73

Appendix A Abbreviations and Acronyms Appendix B Historic Federal Unions Appendix C Clauses in National Constitutions Limiting Sovereignty Appendix D Archives and Collections Appendix E Interviews Index to Volume 1

95 105 125 127 141 159 177 199 215 235 247 249 253 255 267 275 277


V o l 2: From W orld Federalism to G lobal Governance

Introduction to Volume 2 14. Albert Einstein on W orld Government 15. Robert M. Hutchins: Framing a W orld Constitution 16. The Crusade and the W orld Movement 17. Cord Meyer: Mainstream Work! Federalism 18. The Foundation for W orid Government 19. Garry Davis: W orld Citizen in France 20. Henry W allace’s Challenge in the Election o f 1948 Illustrations 21. W hat about Russia? 22. W orid Federalism in the States 23. Climax o f U.S. House and Senate Hearings 24. The Korean W ar and the Decline of the Federalist Movement 25. W orld Federalists in the Cold W ar Conclusion to Both Volumes: Global Governance

299 301 315 331 349 377 399 421 437 44S 461 485 505 527

Appendix F W orld Federalist Declarations Appendix G State Resolutions Appendix H U .S. Congressional Resolutions Appendix I Federalist Journals Appendix J Annotated Bibliography Index to Volume 2

539 557 563 587 597 661


W h e l m s a young man, I volunteered to s a v e a tour o f duty in the U.S. M arine Corps. During recruit training, an old gunnery sergeant explained to about 500 of us in a vast hall: “The purpose o f a battle is to reach a decision. ” This truth has troubled m e to the present. W e were trained to charge into ma­ chine gun fire—that was how the marines took M ount Suribachi on Iwo Jim a. Surely, I thought, there must be a more rational way to reach a decision. During the prolonged tail end of the Vietnam War, when I was so fortunate as to be able to get a classical education at S t John's College, I came upon A Constitution fo r the World, the reprint edition by die Center for the Study o f Democratic In­ stitutions o f the Chicago Committee’s Preliminary D raft o f a World Constitu­ tion. It suddenly dawned upon me that die reason why there are wars is that hu­ manity has no government of the earth that could establish and enforce the rule o f law. I discovered that there had been, in the 1940s, a rather popular political movement to remedy this very defect I wondered, W as not world federalism the fundam ental alternative to the containment policy? W as it not something f a Americans to be for, in place of anti-communism? This book began as a doctoral dissertation at Boston University over 20 years ago. Thanks go to the history faculty there, notably John Armstrong, Sidney Burrell, W illiam Newman, and Arnold Offner, who first taught me the techniques o f history. W hen I began, in the late 1970s, “world history” was not thought quite a proper study, and “U.N. reform” was a taboo term in the international com m unity. Nevertheless, I pursued what on the face of it was a great and tim e­ ly subject—the history of what has actually been attempted to politically unite the human race in order to establish the rule of world law and thus to abolish war. I collected m aterial while working as director o f the New York office o f one o f the nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) accredited to the U N . (the W orld Association of W orld Federalists), and then brought the s ta y up to date



w hile trying to “strengthen the U.N.” by building public support for it deep within one of its principal member states, the United States (through the Coali­ tion for a Strong U.N., which hosted public conferences on U.N. issues at the Kennedy Library in Boston). I now teach world history, international relations, English history, and history o f math and science at W orcester State College in central M assachusetts. W hen a young scholar dares to enter a little worked field and undertakes to make an original contribution to knowledge, a little understanding and encour­ agement by older, more experienced people can be of immense help. Just a kind word or two every year can keep one going. I am deeply grateful to all those I have interviewed, as can be seen in Appendix E, especially, in the beginning, Louis B. Sohn, Elisabeth Mann Börgese, Richard A. Falk, Stewart Ogilvy, and Edith Wyrmer, and, later, W arren Kuehl, Saul Mendlovitz, Dr. Campbell Moses, M aurice Bertrand, W inston Langley, Gary Ostrower, Lawrence W ittner, Charles Chatfield, and Ralph Levering. I am honored to have interviewed so many sur­ viving members of the old movement, but I have deliberately kept my distance in order to preserve my intellectual integrity. No one else is responsible for my historical judgm ents in this book. Thanks, too, go to every reference librarian, as at the collections listed in Appendix D. They are among the most resourceful and generous o f all profes­ sionals, like assistant professors. I cannot om it appreciation to the inventors o f the M acintosh computer and the designers of ClarisW orks—what a dream is its handling of footnotes! In this book, we print them at the foot o f every page, where the reader who wishes to check a fact can do so at a glance. I also am grateful to my late parents, good people who survived the Depression and the Second W orld W ar, they understood my project And fulfilling an old promise to myself, I dedicate this book to the memory of my sister, Mary. I have missed her while researching and writing this book. —Joseph Preston Baratta


I n December o f 2000 as the books were closing oo the C linton adm inistration, Samuel R. Berger, assistant to the president for national security affairs, in an article, “A Sovereign Policy for the Global Age,” offered this opinion o f the road ahead: “M ore tasks remain—from supporting new dém ocraties to fighting international terrorism to reinventing the United Nations” (Foreign Affairs, N6vember/December 2000, Volume 79, Number 6). One o f the principal questions surrounding the consequences o f die inexorable tide o f globalization is, How can die Charter of the United Nations, signed by 51 Nations alm ost six decades ago, fulfill its noble mandate of saving succeeding generations from the scourge of war? As Berger and many others have pointed out, the watershed event of the past decade, the end of the Cold W ar, with the implosion o f the Soviet Union, presented the world with an incredible opportun­ ity. Tbe U.N., once immobilized by the threat o f a Soviet veto in the Security Council, could hopefully be reconfigured in the new post Cold W ar era to take effective action on matters of international peace and security and help achieve the goals o f the U.N.’s founders. However, a new design for that kind of international order was not achieved, and precious tim e and momentum for change were lost as the Clinton adminis­ tration was forced to spend m ost o f its time trying to persuade a recalcitrant Congress to pay our delinquent dues to the world body before the invocation o f Article 19 of the Charter deprived us of our vote in the General Assembly. Re­ grettably the advent of a new administration in 2001 has, as this foreword is be­ ing written, made it abundantly clear with its unilateral approach to world affairs that, although it favors payment on an annual basis of our U.N. dues, it does not view the world body as an institution with the capability o f giving us either now or in the future world peace through world law. My predecessor as president of the W orld Federalist Association was the late



Norman Cousins, former editor o f the Saturday Review o f Books and a co-found­ er o f Americans United for W orld Governm ent It ultimately became the W orld Federalist Association, which from its inception was based on the fundamental premise that world peace could only be attained under world law which required the transformation of the United Nations, a membership organization o f nation states, into a democratic world federation. A few years ago when we celebrated the 50th anniversary o f die U N ., it was my privilege to engage in a debate o f sorts with Richard Armitage, a form er U.S. ambassador and an assistant secretary o f defense for international security affairs under President Ronald Reagan, and more recently undersecretary o f state in the administration o f President George W. Bush. His position was that in the 50th year o f its existence the U.N. was an institution that had “run am ok in term s o f its C h art» .” He also opined that it had been form ed sim ply as a “coalition o f nations” who came together on the basis o f “great pow er gover­ nance in an effort to prevent a third conflagration." Hence, “W e should either bring the United Nations organization back to its roots or create a new member­ ship reflecting the intent of the Charter and the vision of the founders.” M y response to Mr. Armitage both then and now is that there m ust be a re­ definition o f security in a way that recognizes a simple truth: That we are inter­ dependent on a planet that will perish, whether we are talking about the environ­ ment, violations o f human rights, or peace and security. These are transnational problems that have to be within the jurisdiction of a revived, reformed, and re­ structured United Nations. That new structural framework m ust be based on a new organizing principle. Whereas he looked upon the United Nations as am ere coalition o f nations united by a triumph over fascism in W orld W ar n whose or­ ganizing principle was “great power governance,” I made the argument for some­ thing quite différait—namely, a democratic world federation which would func­ tion as a system o f governance based in the enactment, interpretation and en­ forcement o f world law. My view in that regard followed the language o f House Concurrent Resolution 64 introduced in 1949 with 111 co-sponsors, more than one quarter o f the total membership of the U.S. House o f Representatives. It read in part: “It is the sense of Congress that it should be a fundamental objec­ tive o f the foreign policy o f the United states to support and strengthen the Unit­ ed N ations and to seek its development into a world federation open to all na­ tions with definite and limited powers adequate to preserve peace and prevent ag­ gression through the enactment, interpretation and enforcement of world law.” Tragically, from the perspective of those of us who are world federalists, that expression o f political will in favor of a United Nations with the capabilities de­ scribed represents the apogee of what was then and now a truly new organizing principle for a world body designed to carry out far more than great power gover­ nance. The politics of global governance was very shortly submerged under the sweeping tides of the Cold War. However, undeterred and undiscouraged the work of promoting the vision of a democratic, empowered U N . system still continues.



As I write these words in the early spring of 2003, the crisis of superpower politics of the Cold W ar has b e a t replaced by the second crisis in little m ote than a decade in the Persian Gulf, followed by the effort to disarm Iraq and free the world o f the threat of the possession o f weapons o f mass destruction by the Iraqi dictator, Saddam Hussein. The United Nations Security Council has served as principal forum in which efforts to arrive at a solution to that problem has taken place. I perhaps may be on the side of wishful thinking and unrestrained optimism. Nevertheless, I believe that in however perverse a manner that his­ toric intervention has served to refocus the attention of the entire world on the importance o f having an effective and empowered world body as the site for decision-m aking in matters o f war and peace. I believe that it can have enor­ mous and positive consequences for the further evolution and eventual transfor­ mation of the present U N . into a democratic world federation. It is in the context o f these ongoing developments in international affairs that Joseph B aratta's work on The Politics o f World Federalism has newly arrived. It is not only enormously useful as an historical approach to the efforts to reach the goal o f a world where world law has replaced the use of warfare as a means of maintaining peace and stability. His explanation o f the role of politics in laying the necessary foundation for such a revolutionary transformation in both thought and action helps to close the gap between vision and reality that so often per­ vades discussions in this area o f human affairs. As the head of a non-governmental organization which has been in existence during m ost o f the period that furnishes the material for the author’s research, I am most impressed by his selection of materials that are relevant to his search for the truth about world governm ent He successfully challenges the notion that a m ere aggregation in whatever form o f purely sovereign nation states should be the lim its of our horizon in die continuing search for peace and ju s­ tice. W orld peace through world law should be our ultimate political goal. His book, I believe and m ore than that—hope and pray—brings us another step farther along the road toward that goal. —John Anderson Independent Candidate for U.S. President in 1980 (W inner of 5,719,437 votes—6.6% of electorate)

Introduction to Both Volum es Truth passes through three stages: first, it is condemned, then it briefly triumphs, and finally it ends as platitude. —Arthur Schopenhauer, The World as WHI and Idea, Foreword to the First Edition (1818), p. xv

_ Summary Overview ib is book is a history of the practical, political efforts to establish a consti­ tutionally limited, democratically representative, federal world government in or­ der to effectively abolish war. Historically, during the coming, waging, and af­ termath o f World W ar n , a number of people in and out of government in Amer­ ica and in the eventually 51 allied countries in the wartime “United Nations” urged that the failed League o f Nations not be simply revived, even with U.S. membership, but be transformed into the beginnings of a representative world government. In principle, they argued that the moment had come to guide inter­ national organization through a transition like that when the United States under the Articles of Confederation (1781) passed to a more perfect union under the federal Constitution (1787). Europeans, too, looked to federation as an end to endemic wars, and in time the European Union would be the practical realization o f such dreams. The basic idea is to do effectively for the world what has been painfully, but proudly, done for well organized national states—establish peace under the rule o f law. Real liberty, as Immanuel Kant argued, exists only by obedience to law. The consent o f the governed for the enactment of that law is the basis of demo­ cratic states. But the new United Nations Organization (1945) remained in prin­ ciple a confederation o f states, so world federalists then aimed to reform it into a representative federation of states and peoples. The closest the United States has ever crane to support for a world federation was in the State Department during deliberations about the shape of the U.N. or­ ganization in 1942-43, and again, after first use of atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, during negotiations over the Baruch plan for the international con­ trol o f atomic energy in 1946. There were hearings on world federation in Con­ gress in 1948-50, but amity among the victorious allies of W orld W ar n could



not be maintained, and the Cold W ar emerged as the reality o f international life for 40 years. In Europe, practical thought focused more on a regional union, though many recognized that world peace ultimately would require a union o f all regions. The European Community (1951) and the European Union, established by the Maas­ tricht Treaty (1992) and at time of writing a European Constitution (2003), are the m ost fam iliar examples o f the practical federation o f modem states. In Eu­ rope, powers to regulate commerce (common management o f coal and steel in­ dustries, a common market, and now a common currency—the euro) have been vested in die central institutions, while powers to provide for the common de­ fense and foreign policy have still been retained by the states or their peoples. In national life, history shows many instances o f the choice o f federation as a form of government to create unity while preserving diversity, starting with the United States of America in 1787. Other federations include Canada, M exico, Brazil, Switzerland, Germany, Nigeria, and Russia (30 historic federations to date). Unitary states like Britain, France, Italy, Spain, India, and even China have experienced devolution or decentralization recently in various degrees. Very novel political institutions at regional and world levels are evolving at the beginning of the 21st century. The United Nations, in its basic brochures, defines itself as “not a world government,” yet treaties on human rights (25 o f which are currently binding), peacekeeping operations using national m ilitary forces, and treaties and protocols on the environment show the way to the future. The unity slowly being forged out of diversity in the future will probably be as novel in comparison to the historic national federations as the federations were to the confederations and monarchies that preceded them. One World was the title of a book by W endell W illlrie, the Republican chal­ lenger in 1940, whom President Franklin D. Roosevelt sent around the world on a goodwill mission in the m idst o f W orld W ar n . “One W orld" gave a name to the aspirations o f a generation o f internationalists. Originally, the book before you was entitled, “W hat Happened to One World?” The short answer is that the ideal o f a united, peaceful world is resurfacing in the public mind even while it remains utopian to scholars aligned with current trends in policy. This book is properly entitled The Politics o f World Federation because its whole burden is to treat world federation not merely as an ideal, nor as a proposal for the leaders o f sovereign states to act upon, but as a popular movement, re­ flective o f the general will, in the tradition of democratic politics. W e begin to abandon the distinction between domestic politics (elections and the enactment o f the laws) and world politics (relations between sovereign states that acknowledge no higher law). We remember that in all democratic theory (liberal and socialist) the people are sovereign. The view here, like that of Grenville Clark and the or­ ganizers of United W orld Federalists, is that until world federation becomes a m atter for domestic politics, it w ill remain an idle dream. Hence, the climax o f this book comes in the chapters on Henry W allace, political action in the states, and the House and Senate hearings on world federalist bills in 1948,1949, and

Introduction to Both Volumes


1950. The measure h o e o f the movement is influence. The idea is treated as practical policy in the context, first, of the planning for the United N ations Or­ ganization in the midst o f W orld W ar n , then, second, o f the emerging contain­ m ent policy a t the start o f the Cold War. Focus is cm the transition and the for­ mation, under public pressure, o f an alternative foreign policy by the United States, allies, and adversaries. H ie hope is that the bode will sav e , not for easy im itation in the future, but as a reminder that greater things are possible than the current drift of policy. nom m nr wono rMMOuvs The idea of creating a political union o f states and peoples in o rd a to abolish w ar may be traced back for centuries—back to Woodrow W ilson, Peter Kropot­ kin, Jeremy Bentham, Immanuel Kant, l’abbé de Saint-Pierre, W illiam Penn, Henry IV, le duc de Sully, and even Dante—but until the collapse of the League o f N ations in the 1930s m ost such proposals o f international union were not strictly federalist Kant, for instance, proposed only a confederation of free and independent states. The League of Nations (and its successor the United Nations) was the great realization of the dreams of a confederal system of nation states; for all its lim itations, it was a triumph in the slow and painful progress o f interna­ tional law. By 1939, however, as the League collapsed, bolder spirits began to call for establishm ent o f a true world federal government, by delegation o f sovereign powers at least for the maintenance of peace and security. They are the principal subjects of this book. They included Clarence Streit, author o f the bode that practically conjured up the movement, Union Now. A nother was Tom O tto Griessemer, German émigré from Hitler’s Reich, who edited World Government News. Griessemer, educator Vernon Nash, and advertising executive M ildred Riorden Blake founded W orld Federalists in New York in 1941. The W all Street lawyer and “statesman incognito” behind the W ilson and Roosevelt administra­ tions, Grenville Clark, had some influence when the tim es were auspicious, and later he and Harvard international lawyer Louis B. Sohn wrote one o f the classics o f the movement, World Peace through World Law .* 1 U.S. Supreme Court Jus­ tice Owen J. Roberts retired from the Court in 1945 in order to publicly advocate A tlantic union as a stage to world union; he cooperated with both Streit and Clark. The world-renowned physicist and another émigré from Hitler’s Germany A lbert Einstein was an eloquent proponent of the idea. Atomic scientists Leo Szilard and J. Robert Oppenheimer supported it, too. The essayist, E. B. W hite, wrote a rare book o f good humor about world government, The W ild F lag.2 Chancellor Robert M . Hutchins at the University of Chicago and his dynamic professor o f European literature Giuseppe Antonio B örgese led the Committee to Frame a W orld Constitution, which produced another classic, The Preliminary 1Grenville Clark and Louis B. Sohn, World Peace through World Law (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1958; 2nd ed., 1960; 3rd, 1966). 1E. B. White, The Wild Flag (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1946).



D raft o f a World Constitution.* * His wife Elizabeth Mann Borgese (daughter o f Thomas Mann) became a leader o f the W orld Movement and later organized the Pacem in M aribus conferences on die Law of the Sea. In the organized American movement, cofounder o f Americans United for W orld Government, Thomas K. Fmletter, was President Truman’s secretary o f the air force. Another cofounder o f Americans United was influential editor of the Saturday Review o f Books Norman Cousins. The only substantial money to come into the movement—$1 m illion from M cCormick reaper heiress Anita McCormick Blaine—funded die Foundation for W orld Government, which was managed by Stringfellow Barr, former president of St. John’s College, where the classics had been reintroduced in 1937. Among the U niversity o f Chicago group, the great bodes, which belong to no one nation, were read in that "great conversation," as M ortimer Adler put it, o f man as a rational being. Barr used to say, "To flourish, liberal education m ust be universal.... Only a reign o f law between nations w ill permit any government to concern itself seriously with the liberal education o f its citizens.”4 Why the foundation failed is an instructive tale. The founder o f Student Federalists was Harris W offord, who would later serve the Kennedy administration as a regional director of the Peace Corps; he became briefly a U.S. senator from Pennsylvania. Wounded army veteran Rentier Lee ("Jack") W hitehouse, with veterans David McCoy and Paul Sauer, founded the m ost radical student and veterans’ group a t Northwestern University, in which briefly the flame o f future world political union burned brightly. The "W orld Republic Boys,” as they were called by admiring, but doubtful, adults, had ju st enough spunk to pressure Americans United and W orld Federalists to merge into United W orld Federalists (UWF) by February 1947. UWF’s second president (1949-52) was Alan Cranston, later a U.S. senator from C alifornia (1969-93). Outside the United States, world federalists included Lord Lothian (till 1930 Philip Kerr), who wrote another classic, Pacifism Is N ot Enough,* before he be­ came ambassador to the United States in 1939-40. Lothian was one of several English federalists, including Lionel Curtis, who had labored to transform the British Empire into an imperial federation as the nucleus o f a world federation. Others followed th a n on European and world federation, including Sir W illiam Beveridge, Lionel Robbins (later Lord Robbins), John Boyd O rr (later Lord Boyd-O rr), and Arnold Toynbee, the creative world historian. Prime M inister W inston Churchill made an actual offer, not often remembered, of British union with France on 16 June 1940; Toynbee was coauthor o f this proposal. Then, ’ Committee to Frame a World Constitution; Robert M. Hutchins, president; O. A. Borgese, secretary; “Preliminary Draft of a World Constitution,” Common Cause, 1 (March 1948), 1-40. Reprinted as A Constitution fo r the World by the Center for die Study of Democratic Institutions, Santa Barbara, CA, 1965. ‘ Stringfellow Barr, “Education: For Nations or Human Beings,” Common Cause, 1 (September 1947): 83. * [Philip Kerr,] “The End of War,” The Round Table, 5, 20 (September 1915): 772-96; Lord Lothian, Pacifism Is Not Enough, 219-63.

Introduction to Both Volumes


beginning with his speech ai Zurich in September 1946, Churchill daringly pro­ posed Franco-Germ an reconciliation, which culminated with plans for the con­ federal Council o f Europe in 1948. British member o f Parliam ent Henry Usborne, elected to Clement Attlee’s government in 1945, led a campaign to bring about a constitutional convention by unofficial popular elections, known as the peoples’ convention. He was supported by Hungarian pacifist Rosika Schwim­ m er (moving spirit behind the Henry Ford Peace Ship in 1915), Edith W ynner, and Georgia Lloyd. Jean Monnet, the French banker, was inspired by Churchill’s offer and guided the process o f creating the more federal European Community. Italy’s Altiero Spinelli, who was impressed by the British federalists, deeply served European union; in 1984 as an elected member of the European Parliament, he chaired the group that produced the D raft Treaty Establishing the European Union.* That treaty, though not ratified, yet leading to the Council of M inisters’ Single Euro­ pean Act o f 1986 and the M aastricht treaty of 1992, which avoided early federa­ tion, was certainly the most significant recent draft constitution for the practical federation erf modem states. At time of writing, still another constitution for the European Union has been drafted under the chairmanship of former French Presi­ dent Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, designed to incorporate another ten members into the Union (for a total o f 25) by 2004. Pope John x x m ’s encyclical, Pacem in Terris (1963), sim ilarly maintained high principle in the depths o f the Cold W ar with its profound argument for a “public authority... on a world-wide basis.” In India, M. K. (Mahatma) Gandhi once said that world federation could be based only on a foundation o f nonviolence. Later, India’s first prime m inister Jawaharlal Nehru echoed these views when approached by world federalists but shifted course toward nonalignment. In Japan, M orikatsu Inagaki was a leader by 1948, soon joined by the atomic scientist Hideki Yukawa. The W orld Move­ m ent for W orld Federal Government in 1950 consisted o f 73 organizations with­ in 22 countries, with a total individual membership of 151,000.7 (The American UWF had a peak membership in 1949 o f 47,000.) In a survey of the literature worldwide, Strengthening the United Nations, we have found substantial works from 72 nations and five intergovernmental organizations on systemic U.N. re­ form and world federalism. Outside of the United States, Canada, and W estern Europe, the next most fertile countries for federalist thinking were, in this order, India, Japan, M exico, and so on down to Paraguay, Tunisia, and Z aire.' It has not been an “American” movement. Since the 1940s, prominent leaders have 1* € POLITICS OF WORLD FEDERATION

Through M arch and April 1946, he was busy assembling his team o f associates, reading the A cheson-Lilienthal report, and considering various alternatives, in­ cluding world governm ent The State Department policy toward the U N . a t this tim e still professed to favor “the rule o f law among nations" in order to “banish the scourge o f w ar from the earth.” " Even the join t chiefs of staff, when they were exploring activation o f the U N ’s m ilitary staff committee (A rticles 4 6 47), were on record in favor o f an educational program to hurry “establishment o f the regime o f world law and order.”1* The objective was called an Atomic Devel­ opment Authority (ADA). Bernard Baruch was somewhat notorious in American annals as a W all Street speculator who rose to the widely accorded stature o f “elder statesm an." In the 1890s, starting as an office boy in a linen business, he came to associate with such figures as Thomas Fortune Ryan, John (“Bet a M illion”) Gates, railroad baron E. W. Harriman, oil king John D. Rockefeller, steel magnate J. Pierpont M organ, and mining monopolists M eyer and Daniel Guggenheim. By the turn of the century, Baruch, at age 30, had risen to partnership in a brokerage firm and m ade his first m illimi dollars. O ver the years he continued to amass a fortune from the stock market. In 1916 President W ilson appointed him to die Advisory Commission o f the Council o f National Defense. In early 1918 Baruch became chairman o f the W ar Industries Board, which be soon developed into an exemplary agency for m ili­ tary-industrial cooperation in tim e o f war. In 1919 he served on the Supreme Economic Council at V ersailles and advised President W ilson on the terms o f peace. Later, Baruch, a Democrat, supported the president on his League fight in the Senate. Twenty years later the elder statesman was again brought to W ash­ ington to advise President Roosevelt on m obilization, especially in setting up the W ar Production Board under Sears, Roebuck executive Donald Nelson (not Baruch’s nominee). Baruch him self held no adm inistrative position. An indus­ trialist who worked with Baruch in this period later recalled his “sim plicity and judicial reasonableness.” Baruch’s appointment by President Truman as Ameri­ can representative to die U N . AEC at age 75 was his last m ajor public respon­ sibility, though he continued to make him self available as advisor to presidents until Eisenhower’s adm inistration.10 Baruch’s hand-picked delegation to the U.N. AEC had more to recommend them than association with him on W all Street. They were: Herbert B. Swope, reporter and editor for the New York World and member o f the W ar Industries '* Department of State, Foreign Policy of the United States, 1 December 1945. ibid., 1: 712-14. “ Joint Chiefs of Staff to State—W ar-Navy Coordinating Committee, Guidance as to the M ilitary Implications of a United Nations Commission on Atomic Energy, 23 January 1946, ibid., 1: 748-49. * Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th ed. (1979), s.v. “Baruch, Bernard (Mannes),” 1: 847; Bernard M. Baruch, Baruch: The Public Years (New York: Holt, Rinehart A Winston, 1960), 1-2, 293-94, 357-82; Holliday to Clark, 12 October 1946, Clark Papers, 21.10.

Ih* tanıdı Plon for İh » Intamdlonal Control of Atomic Energy


Board; John Hancock, investment hanker and assistant to B arudi a t the O ffice of W ar M obilization; Ferdinand Eberstadt, member of the W ar Production Board; and Fred Searls, president of Newmont M ining Corp. and assistant to Byrnes in the Office of W ar M obilization. G od of th e AboMon of Wer Baruch’s original idea for discussion with the State Department was that the U.N. should be “strengthened." His aide John Hancock asked Undersecretary Acheson, “W hat if the Russians or someone else should ... want to strengthen the United Nations—then what would be the answer?" Acheson squelched the idea: “There would be no power in the United Nations to pass legislation along those lines.” The foundation of the atomic developm ent authority “had to be a Treaty. This effectively m eant no U.N. C hart» revision, since that would re­ quire a new grant o f sovereignty. W ithin such a constraint, the team neverthe­ less pressed for the abolition of war. Baruch’s second aide, Ferdinand Eberstadt, suggested that goal:22 One thing is certain. The release of atomic energy will revolutionize the world. The great uncertainty is whether this revolution will be for the better­ ment of mankind or for its destruction. There is one power on earth greater even than the release of atomic energy. That is the determination of all peo­ ples that war shall end. The true measure of our success will be the nearness of our approach to this goal.

Baruch him self on 7 M ay, in the earliest record o f his thought, set the goal as the “elimination o f war.” He had in mind stopping the manufacture erf atomic bombs, subsequent establishm ent o f an international atomic control agency, en­ largement o f its functions to include control of conventional weapons, elim ina­ tion o f the veto power, world command of all armed forces, reduction o f national forces to police levels, constitutional prohibitions in all countries against resort to war analogous to the clause General MacArthur had inserted into the Japanese constitution, and enlarged courts “to decide a l l ... questions by arbitram ent o f reason rather than by arbitram ent o f force.” “This may seem like an am bitious program ,” Baruch commented, “but here is the opportunity to go towards the light at the end of the tunnel—eternal peace.”22 Reports by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Baruch’s files indicate a lively debate at the tim e between atom ic scientists who advocated “speedy adoption of W orld Government” and cautious political scientists who thought “international controls of fissionable m aterials should lie w ithin the 1

11 Memo of Conversation by John Hancock, 1 May 1946, Baruch Papers, 52.4; also in Foreign Relations, 1946, 1: 782. “ Ferdinand Eberstadt to Boss, 6 May 1946, Baruch Papers, 52.4. D Draft [for Discussion], 7 May 1946, ibid. “Eternal” crossed out in typescript.



field o f the United N ations.”14 A study by the prom inent professor o f interna­ tional law Quincy W right provided for an atomic energy commission to “make recommendations to the Security Council or the General Assembly by majority vote” and, like the Russians later, provided for national criminal prosecution of offenders.11 The highly articulate M arine Corps veteran Cord M ey » Jr., on whom many eyes were focused as an able spokesman for peace and who would becom e the first president o f United W orld Federalists, subm itted a first-rate world government critique of the Acbeson-Lilienthal proposal. He concentrated on the ambiguities in the transfer stages and the need for fundamental U N . re­ form to end the international anarchy. Baruch did not reply, but actually M eyer seems to have been articulating the older man’s looser thought“ J. Robert Op­ penheim er gave Baruch a clear briefing on the world government implications of the international control o f atomic energy. There could be “no prevention o f war unless international law could apply to the citizens of nations, as federal law does to those o f states.” W hat was needed, he wrote, was “an appropriate delegation o f national sovereignty,” a “world government in the field o f atomic energy.”17 The Problem of Enforcement Talk o f world government like this in the U.S. delegation, am idst the many technical concerns about uranium ores, ownership or dominion over potentially dangerous activities, and other matters implied in the Acheson-Lilienthal repent, produced an “explosion,” to use the word o f the official historians, at the B lairLee house in m id-M ay. The plan purported to provide “controls and safeguards,” said H. B. Swope, Baruch’s third in line. W hat would happen if a “definite vio­ lation” occurred? Hancock recommended “penalties for infringem ent” The truth is, added Eberstadt, the plan does not “abolish atom ic w arfare.” The public should be so informed. To this outburst by Baruch’s chief aides, Acheson retorted that there were only two ways to go further than the Lilienthal board—collective security, in which all nations would bind themselves by treaty to go to w ar against a viola-* » James T. Shotwell, Report of Progress, 5 April 1946, Baruch Papers, 56. One of the atomic scientists was Columbia’s 1.1. Rabi, who advocated “effective internation­ al government.” Shotwell replied: “Mr. Rabi might have logic on his side but in po­ litics logic is seldom the guide. The policies adopted by the peoples of the world are more often creatures of history than of reason.... If we try for too high stakes, if we were to be misled by the mirage of world government, we might fail in our task and bring the whole structure down. We cannot gamble with the future of humanity.” Minutes of Committee on Atomic Energy, 11 May 1946, ibid. Both Baruch and State rejected a Carnegie draft treaty because it provided for virtually no international con­ trol. u Quincy Wright, Draft for a Convention on Development and Control of Atomic Energy, 1 May 1946, ibid. W right’s proposal was first published in Bulletin o f the Atomic Scientists, 1 April 1946, pp. 11-13. It was probably the most legally strict and politically neutral of all proposals for the international control of atomic energy. “ Cord Meyer Jr., Hope or Illusion, 29 May 1946, Baruch Papers, 52.4. ” Oppenheimer, Atomic Explosives, pp. 7-8.

İh » Bauch Plan for th» International Control of Atomic Energy


tor, and “world government,” which would treat all wars as civil wars. The first m eant little, and the second not a “damned thing.” 3* Lata-, Acheson explained his contempt for world governm ent “He said that any organization, any govern­ m en t is based on the emotional, spiritual acceptance o f it by 95% of the people. W hen you have 20% of the people who are not going along, the governm ent ju st does not w ork.... This is true in our own country with our strikes and labor difficulties.... It has been true with the British in Ireland, and [in] Palestine, [and] in India.” 2' The upshot was that Baruch found State extremely reluctant to reconsider its A cheson-Lilienthal proposal. This fact would have disastrous consequences on the subsequent negotiations. For the next three weeks until Truman’s 7 June decision on policy, Baruch and his aides chafed against the restrictions of the State Department. They seem to have been swept up in honest enthusiasm for their task, if not intellectually prepared for its full im plications. Control of all weapons o f m ass destruction, intervention in domestic affairs by either an inspecting or owning control agen­ cy, supremacy or subordination of the international authority to national authori­ ties, conflicts o f obedience o f m ilitary officers to the authority or to heads o f states, reliable finances not dependent on national contributions, penalties for violators, the necessity to prevent—not win—the next w ar these political im­ plications o f an international atomic development authority had begun to puzzle the Baruch team. Perusal o f the record indicates not that Baruch was devising some M achiavellian scheme to dominate Russia but that he sincerely wished to establish an international atomic energy control system, while carefully guarding American security. Later, during the negotiations, his American concerns got the better o f his internationalism . But in this formative period, he and his team took internationalism seriously, including the alternative of world government, such as it was presented at the time.30 M [J. P. Davis,] Notes on Conference at Blair-Lee House, 17 May 1946, ibid.; Richard O. Hewlett and Oscar E. Anderson Jr., A History o f the United States Atomic Energy Commission, vol. 1: The New World, 1939-1946 (University Park. PA, 1962), 563-66. * Memo of Conversation [between Acbeson and Baruch] by John C. Ross, 2 No­ vember 1946, Foreign Relations, 1946, 1: 985. M It was in this period that Hancock began to hedge on ownership of uranium and thorium ores, production plants, fissionable materials, and power stations, in favor of "dom inion,” since a number of capitalists had expressed fear that the Acheson-Lilienthal plan would be “the first step to an international socialized State.” Hancock thought ownership of the ores in the ground, in addition to inspec­ tion, would be sufficient, without owning the plants, materials, and stations. Even so, there would be much interference with local economies. That was necessary “for national safety.” Hancock certainly did not have world government in mind. He seems to have imagined the ADA as a sort of international war industries board. Still, he saw the necessity for personal responsibility to the authority and for amending national constitutions accordingly. Memo of Conversation by John M. Hancock, 1 June 1946, Foreign Relations, 1946, 1: 817-24. Cf. Gardner, Architects, 193-94; Lieberman, Scorpion, 276.



Baruch continued his thinking on “outlawing war.” To prohibitions against the atom ic bomb, he suggested adding others against bombers, rockets, and bio­ logical warfare. He brought in the precedent of the Nuremberg trials for individ­ ual responsibility. An “agency" would supervise the courts and an international police force, after standing armies were eliminated. He imagined:11 There would be turned loose the energies of mankind and these would be used to look forward with hope to the development of their bodies and spirit, and the comforts of education for themselves and their children. It would release more energy than atomic energy could develop.

He perceived that “automatic penalization" or enforcem ent was essential to a workable plan. “Unless teeth are put into action, [the] public (the American and the W orld) w ill dism iss [the] plan as m erely a pious w ish."11 In an interview with Byrnes on 30 May, B arudi fully developed his ideas—especially inclusion o f “all other m ajor weapons adaptable to m ass destruction,” to conform to the terms o f reference o f the U.N. AEC, and enlargement o f the “International Court or Tribunal,” in order to provide sure enforcem ent on individuals as at Nurem­ berg. “W hy not try to do the thing which m ust be done,” Baruch concluded, “rather than do som ething piecem eal [like the A cheson-Lilienthal proposal] which would raise hopes for peace, but never quiet the fears o f war?”” In the next few days, a deep policy dispute developed between Baruch and Acheson on the issue o f penalties. As so often in the 1940s, the dispute was over nascent conceptions o f world government versus the traditions of national­ ism.14 Hancock explained that, in the Baruch team ’s conception, the internation­ al control o f atom ic energy im plied lim itations o f national sovereignty: “Any international control is going to involve some surrender o f jurisdiction." No great power could be allowed to defy the judgments o f the international authori­ ty. But that ran straight against the veto provision in the U.N. Charter. Hancock straggled to find a way to lim it the veto power w ithout opening the question of 15* 11 War hurries things that are in the making, 22 May 1946, Baruch Papers, S2.4. » BMB Agenda, 23 May 1946, ibid. 51 Draft of Mr. Baruch's talk to JFB, 26 May 1946, ibid.; B.M.B. Memo, 31 May 1946, ibid. Hancock attended this interview and found that State was giving very lit­ tle thought to the international control of atomic energy. When Baruch asked Byrnes what his policies were, Byrnes replied, “Oh, bell, I have none. What are your views?” Memo of Conversation [between Baruch, Byrnes, Hancock, and Acheson] by John M. Hancock, 30 May 1946, Foreign Relations, 1946, 1: 802-06. MThe historian D. F. Fleming, who was a trusted consultant to Baruch at this time, urged him to seek “the elimination of war itself.” He should avoid “the method of simple renunciation, unsupported by effective guarantees of security and armament limitation,” as had been tried without success in the 1920s. “This time we must take the hard road of setting up controls and establishing institutions to make them work. ... We cannot admit that man is gaining the infinite secrets of the universe itself only as a means for his own destruction.” D. F. Fleming, 27 May 1946, Baruch Papers, 52.4.

İh* Baud) Plan for th* IrfumaAonal Gorftol of Atomic Energy


U.N. revision. It was an im possible task, but he thought he had it in specific penalties for crim es relating to atomic energy, in which cases the veto would be disallowed. “The essence o f our suggestions regarding penalties is that this may be a way o f getting around the veto. There isn’t any use in blinking that fact. Otherwise, penalty for violation will not be immediate and certain.’’” He elabo­ rated the “crimes” (e.g., seizure o f an ADA plant) but he did not define the legal recourse.1* On whom were the punishments to be inflicted? States or individu­ als? W hat would be the nature of the punishments? W ar or police action? Baruch never gave clear answers to these questions, except to hint that he had in m ind strengthening the U.N., enlarging the W orld Court, and creating an in­ ternational police force.” Acbeson was contem ptuous. In the world of 1946, “The only sanction is war.” He advised leaving out any mention o f penalties for violations, since they amounted to war, and no useful purpose would be served by so stating. He gave no support to notions of strengthening the U.N. into a world government with legal powers reaching to individuals.1* Baiudi's Eniargsmecf of 1)5. Poky Baruch, however, carried the fight to the top in a meeting with the president, and in die final policy statement he prevailed. Now his full eloquence and sense for the historic moment were brought to bear as he said to President Truman: “I am deeply convinced that any expression which falls short o f bringing a sense o f security and a sense of truth to the public would be a gigantic error.... I want to go farther than the text of that document [Acheson-Lilienthal report].” He clearly saw the necessity for “punishments” and even for “elim inating war.” He left for the future, however, “an outline of the mechanism whereby punishm ent is to come.” He doubted that in a m atter so great as the establishment o f international control over atom ic energy, and hence over war itself, the way to proceed to an agreem ent was by “the ordinary processes o f diplomacy.” He recommended a method “that strikes to the very heart of public thinking and feeling”—“a procla­ m ation o f not m erely a basis o f negotiations but a form ula o f lasting peace.”1* Truman apparently was impressed. He approved what was in effect a lim itation o f U.S. sovereignty in the policy provision that any national atom ic energy au­ thority would be “subordinate to direction and absolute dominion” o f an interna-45

” Hancock to Bynıes, 1 June 1946, ibid.; Foreign Relations, 1946, 1: 824—26. 54 Hancock, Draft [of U.S. Policy], 4 June 1946, Baruch Papers, 52.4; Foreign Re­ lations, 1946, 1: 827-33. ” B.M.B. Memo, 31 May 1946, Baruch Papers, 52.4; Hancock to Baruch, 4 June 1946, ibid. " Meeting in State Department, 30 May 1946, ibid.; Acheson to Byrnes, 6 June 1946, Foreign Relations, 1946, 1: 836-37. Byrnes actually thought that “there is now in being adequate international law to cover the matter of personal responsibili­ ty." Hancock, Memo of Meeting, 1 June 1946. Baruch Papers, 52.4. ” Baruch to Thiman, 6 June 1946, Foreign Relations, 1946, 1: 838-40.



tional atomic authority.40 Baruch had won. But what had he won? He had won a commitment from the president, against the advice o f the State Department, to support a proposal for the international control o f atomic energy that went beyond an early warning system, preparatory to an atomic arms race and probable nuclear war. He had not been allowed to en­ large his terms o f reference to include conventional weapons. Nor had the sub­ stance of the A cheson-Lilienthal proposal, notably the ownership functions and the untim ed transition stages, been discarded. Still, Baruch was encouraged. Speaking to five highly placed m ilitary officers, he said a warning system alone was not “worth a dam n." The alternative was reliable international control, which im plied “an immediate and drastic transformation of our form o f govern­ m ent.” It m eant "effective world control o f war (counterpart o f our own Federal G overnm ent). "4I In principle, then, though he him self rarely used the term, Baruch was authorized to make a world government proposal. Success would largely depend on favorable Soviet response and on American flexibility in nego­ tiations. The Besuch Plan before the United Nattons “M y Fellow M embers o f the United N ations Atomic Energy Commission and my Fellow Citizens o f the W orld,” Bernard B arudi began in his historic ad­ dress to the U.N. AEC on 14 June 1946: “We are h o e to make a choice between the quick and the dead." A reader looking for the world government implications o f this speech cannot fail to be impressed. Baruch accepted the atomic scientists’ view that ultim ately there were no secret and no defense. He acknowledged the “w ill o f mankind” to find a “mechanism to assure that atomic energy is used for peaceful purposes and preclude its use in war." He referred to the fundamental concept of enforcem ent by law—“individual responsibility and punishm ent on the principles applied at Nuremberg.” He reminded the members o f the commis­ sion that they represented not only their governments but also the peoples o f the world, who are sovereign: “Governments belong to the peoples."41 “They are not afraid o f an internationalism that protects; they are unwilling to be fobbed off by mouthings about narrow sovereignty, which is today’s phrase for yester40 Truman to Baruch [with enclosed policy statement], 7 June 1946, ibid., 1: 84651. 41 Memo by the United States Representatives on the Military Staff Committee to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 7 June 1946, ibid., 1: 845, emphasis added. The Joint Chiefs were skeptical, even of international control. “We can yield much, even cer­ tain points o f our sovereignty, to reach this solution [of the control of atomic energy],” wrote General Eisenhower. “Whether our people could be brought to see this necessity at present is a question.” Eisenhower to Baruch, 14 June 1946, ibid., 1: 854-56. Admirals Turner, Leahy, and Nimitz doubted that world government could be established in time to obviate a program of national defense. Ibid., 1: 843-54. 41 “United States Atomic Energy Proposals: Statement of the United States Policy on Control of Atomic Energy as Presented by Bernard M. Baruch, Esq., to the United Nations Atomic Energy Commission, June 14, 1946” (Washington, DC: Department of State Publication No. 2560, 1946).

Th* Bondt Pbft for lh* International Control of Atomic Energy


d ay 's isolation.'' He outlined the control system in some detail; sketched the U.S. view on stages o f transfer, beginning with agreement on the charter o f the atom ic authority, then full transfer of secret information, and so on; and argued forcefully for abolition o f the veto in atomic energy matters: “There m ust be no veto to protect those who violate their solemn agreements not to develop or use atom ic energy for destructive purposes.” Early warning was no basis for atomic security. “In the elimination of war lies our solution.’’ Th* People's Response Public response to B aruch's initiative was about two to one in favor.4134* The New York Times opined that the U nited States had made a first step tow ard a “world government over split atoms.”44The Russian press, however, was critical o f any proposal from the capitalist W est to convert the U nited N ations into a “w orld state” whose “m ission it w ill be to save the world from atom ic war.” The intention was U.S. domination of the world. “The florid talk about a ‘world state’ is actually a frank plea for American imperialism,” said Moscow.45 G renville C lark congratulated Baruch but explained that partial abolition of the veto, leaving the league structure o f the U.N. intact, was not enough. Trans­ forming the General Assembly into a world legislature, according to a plan o f weighted representation, was necessary to make abolition of the veto acceptable to the Russians. Under the current structure, the Russians were “hopelessly out­ voted” in the Assembly, where the Latin American countries had voting power (20 votes of 51) far out o f proportion to their population (7 percent). In the Se­ curity Council, where six members were elected by the Assembly, the Russians w ere also consistently outvoted. “As long as this condition prevails,” C lark argued, “one can see why they hang on grimly to the veto.” U nder C lark’s plan, however, where voting would be m ore proportional to population, economic strength, and political power, the Russians would still be in a minority, but world legislators could vote as individuals. Presumably, Rus­ sian representatives and those from the Soviet sphere of influence w ould vote solidly, while those from other countries would split, depending on the issue. Such a reform w ould make voting by m ajority rule on international disputes possible and acceptable. “A fter all, isn’t having a fair chance to carry a vote on * ‘‘Bull’s Eye,” wired James Fonestal. ‘‘Every citizen of our one world owes you his profoundest gratitude for your revolutionary and historic statement,” telegrammed James H. Cox, president of Washington and Jefferson College. Baruch Papers, 59. ‘1 refuse to become a citizen of the world. I owe allegiance to 1 flag. If you like Russia, go there,” one Anna Armstrong scrawled on a postcard. ‘1 did not suggest for any­ body to become a citizen of the world,” Baruch defended himself, “but, as American representative, I was addressing ... the peoples of the world.” Ibid. “ ‘T he Atom Knows No Nations,” New York Times, 16 June 1946. 43 Modest Rubenstein, “The Atomic Age as American Scientists Picture It,” New Times (Moscow), 15 June 1946, quoted in Joseph L. Nogee, Soviet Policy towards International Control o f Atomic Energy (Notre Dame, 1961), 31. Rubenstein was re­ viewing the atomic scientists’ manifesto. One World or None.



the merits the essence o f any governmental plan where ‘sovereignty’ and die veto are w aived?'4* Clark am plified these views in a long letter to the Times. T he Baruch plan was the “entering wedge" for “world governm ent,” he w rote.47 B arudi did not reply.* 44

ftumdnlngllrturtocJ Opportunity M any historians, orthodox and revisionist, have recounted the disastrous fail­ ure of the subsequent negotiations.4* It would be a mistake, we think, to regard Baruch’s proposal and the (me by Andrei Gromyko that followed in five days as mere great power propaganda ploys. That did develop, but not for several months when the fears, distrust, and misunderstandings that had been accumulating since the end of the war produced paralysis in the U.N. ABC at New York and in the peace conference at Paris. The problem is to see why relations betw een the United States and the Soviet Union were not as cordial as they had been at Yalta 16 m onths before. Soviet political expansion into Eastern Europe, exclusive American occupation o f Japan, British intervention in Greece, Russian interven­ tion in Iran, U.S. intervention in China, American objections to extension o f a Russian sphere o f influence toward Turkey and the Dardanelles, Russian fears of new American strategic bases from Iceland to the Pacific islands, the vague threat to civilization by the atom ic bomb, and the inadequacy o f the United Nations to resolve such issues were key events in the decline of friendly relations.10 N evertheless, the opportunity in m id-1946 was not entirely closed. The w orld knew nothing yet of the containm ent doctrine, the M arshall plan, the Czechoslovakian coup, the Berlin blockade, NATO, the Russian A -bom b, the American H -bom b, and the Korean W ar. There was genuine support, world­ wide, for B aruch's proposal to abolish the veto, though its full im plications for lim iting national sovereignty and reforming the U.N. may not have been as viv­ MClark to Baruch, 20 June 1946, Baruch Papers, 59. 41 Clark to Editor, “An Atomic Energy Authority and World Government,” New York Times, 23 June 1946. 44 Baruch never replied to implications of “world government” that correspondents pointed out in his speech. See Bishop Henry Hobsen to Baruch, 3 July 1946, and reply, Baruch Papers, 59. He seems to have feared being linked to “One Worlders,” though his ideas inclined with theirs. After State squelched his idea of “strengthening the U.N.,” his mind apparently did not advance beyond increasing the jurisdiction of the World Court ° U.S. Department of State, “Growth of a Policy: The International Control of Atomic Energy, August 6, 1945 - October 15, 1946” (Washington, DC: Department of State Publication No. 2702, n.d., c. February 1947); U.S. Department of State, “Policy at the Crossroads: The International Control of Atomic Energy, October 15, 1946 - May 17, 1948” (Washington, DC: Department of State Publication No. 3161, June 1948); Hewlett and Anderson, New World, 531-619; Lieberman, Scorpion, 303-412; Gardner, Architects, 195-201; Herken, Winning Weapon, 171-91; Nogee, Soviet Policy, 33-67, 81-89. MClyde Eagleton, “The Beam in Our Own Eye," Harper’s, June 1946, pp. 481-86.

Th » Douch Plan for the International Control of Atomic Energy


idly perceived as its usefulness for getting tough with the Russians.11 N or was R ussia’s use o f the veto as “frequent” as is often recalled today; by 14 June 1946, Russia had used the veto once, in the Syria-Lebanon case, and then on 25 and 26 June, four times, all in reference to the Spanish case.11 Gromyko’s pro­ posal o f a convention to “outlaw” atomic weapons (not by world law but by na­ tionally enforced international law), before establishment o f the international au­ thority, had occurred first to the Lilienthal board itself about six months before.11 G enerally, on the complex and novel questions o f atom ic energy control, the Russians simply rem ained several months behind the Americans. D espite the atmosphere o f a U.S. ultimatum that developed, the Russians actually made sig­ nificant concessions to the American plan, reaching unanimity on scientific and technical questions by September,14and acceptance o f inspection by November.11 W hen the crucial vote on the Baruch plan was called on 30 December 1946, only fo u r sentences (all about the veto) were in dispute.1* AncM A Gromyko Baruch’s counterpart was Andrei Gromyko, whose service to his country spanned the Stalin and Gorbachev eras. Gromyko was trained as an agricultural economist. He was senior research associate at the Institute o f Economics o f the Academy of Sciences, 1936-39, when, in the wake o f Stalin’s great purge o f the C om m unist party, he was elevated to the U.S. division o f the People’s Com­ m issariat o f Foreign A ffairs in 1939. He was then appointed counselor a t the Soviet embassy in W ashington, where he learned English. In 1943 he was made am bassador to the United States, after M axim Litvinov, who had struggled for collective security at the League. Throughout the w ar Gromyko represented Russia in the capital o f her leading ally. In 1946 he became Soviet representa­ tive to the U.N. Security Council. Gromyko had responsibility for bringing the Soviet Union into relation to the new world security organization during the epochal breakup o f wartime una­ nim ity, when Russia’s great interests were reconstruction and security against a revival o f German m ilitarism. He was often photographed in the Security Coun­ cil staring off into space. Gromyko’s im m ediate superior was V ice-Foreign Com m issar Andrei Vishinsky. chief prosecutor at the Stalin purge trials. The MGreat Britain, Canada, Brazil, China, and Mexico seconded the U.S. plan on the 19th, followed in time by Australia, Egypt, and France. ” Sidney D. Bailey, Voting in the Security Council (Bloomington, 1969), 28. Cf. Lieberman, Scorpion, 306. n Acheson-Lilienthal “Report,” p. 4. 54 "The Scientific and Technical Aspects of Atomic Energy Control, A First Report by the Scientific and Technical Committee of the UN Atomic Energy Commission," 27 September 1946, Bulletin o f the Atomic Scientists, October 1946, pp. 6-12. ” “Disarmament Debate in the United Nations General Assembly” and "Principles Governing the General Regulation and Reduction of Armaments,” Bulletin o f the Ato­ mic Scientists, January 1947, pp. 8-9. * “First Report of the Atomic Energy Commission to the Security Council,” 30 December 1946, Bulletin o f the Atomic Scientists, January 1947, pp. 16-27.



witnessing o f the purge and his long absence from Russia during her battle for life seems to have left their mark on the dutiful, obdurate, but yet not humorless Russian representative in the United States. Bernard Baruch told a story that re­ vealed something o f Gromyko’s character as w ell as of the atmosphere o f the U.N. AEC negotiations. One evening Baruch took Gromyko to the second Joe Louis-B illy Conn fight. The champion made a poor showing in the first round, but in the second he pounded poor Conn from pillar to post. A t that point Gro­ m yko leaned over to the distinguished w hite-haired American and said, “Conn m ust wish be had the veto.”17 Th« Gromyko Plan Gromyko’s counterproposal came on 19 June. He proposed, first, an “ex­ change o f scientific information” on fission and “technological processes,” then, second, a “convention” for the “outlawing o f weapons based upon the use of ato­ m ic energy,” like the Hague convention and Geneva protocol against the use o f poisonous gases and bacteriological weapons. The “high contracting parties” would “solemnly declare” that they forbid the production and use of atomic wea­ pons, w ill destroy within three months their existing stockpiles o f atomic bombs (this was the provision that so alarmed the Americans), w ill regard a violation o f the agreem ent as a crim e against hum anity, and w ill pass national legislation within six months to punish violators. A fter such a convention was put into ef­ fect, Gromyko proposed (w ithout tim etable) the establishm ent o f a “system o f control” and “supervision” to “insure the observance” o f the convention. Lastly, a “system o f sanctions for the unlawful use of atomic energy” was to be provid­ ed. He hinted at further possible agreements following from the “immense m or­ al and political significance” of the convention. But he made no reference to an international authority and absolutely rejected the proposal to abolish the veto:1* “Efforts made ... to undermine the unanimity of the M embers of the Security Council, upon questions of substance, are incompatible with the interests o f the United N ations ... for the preservation of peace and security.” In short, only na­ tional control o f atomic energy would be countenanced. Grom yko’s proposal was a disappointm ent—perhaps a deliberate delaying tactic, since it was largely aimed at the Acheson-Lilienthal report available since M arch—but it seems now not to have been completely intractable for negotia­ tion, since it differed prim arily in the sequence of control and abolition. Further signs o f good faith from both sides were surely needed. These, however, were not forthcoming.*75

57Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th ed. (1979), s.v. “Gromyko, Andrei A(ndreyovich),” 4: 749; Baruch, The Public Years, 378-79. In 1957, Mr. Gromyko became foreign commissar, and in 1985 be approved the appointment of Mikhail Gorbachev as general secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. MState, “Growth of a Policy,” Appendix No. 22, pp. 209-16.

İh » Bamdı Plan for th» International Control of Atomic Enorgy


Atomic Tests a t Mdni Afol The U.N. AEC had hardly divided into committees to reconcile the proposals when the United States began atomic tests at Bikini atoll in the Pacific. On 1 July, a B -29 dropped another 20-kiloton bomb of the Hiroshima type on a test fleet o f 73 ships anchored in the lagoon. Why President Truman could have per­ m itted the navy to conduct such a provocative test—at such a delicate moment in negotiations to rid the world o f war, or at least to provide for the security o f the United States by some means other than leadership in an atomic arms race—can only be guessed. There is no doubt that the test, in Pravda’s words, “fundamen­ tally undermined the belief in the seriousness o f American talk about atomic dis­ armament.”** Hedging on Abotfton of the Veto A fter the test, the U.S. submitted three key memos in the U.N. AEC clarify­ ing the Baruch plan. The third, o f July 12th, dealt with the m ost critical prob­ lem o f the relation o f the authority to the United Nations. Abolition o f the veto was to apply only to cases involving atomic weapons. But then atom ic weapons m ight play only an “incidental” part in a general case of aggression, when the powers, authority, and responsibility o f the Security Council would be “unaffec­ ted” (that is, the veto would apply in full). And to underscore the meaning o f such a situation, reference was made to Article 51, which provides for “individual and collective self-defense” in cases when the Security Council cannot a c t This memo, apparently State's doing, hedged Baruch’s proposal until it was em ptied o f meaning.*0 The second Bikini test, on 25 July, provoked a complete Russian rejection of the Baruch plan. Referring specifically to Memo No. 3, Gromyko stated on the 24th: “The American proposals, as they are presented now, cannot be accepted by the Soviet Union either as a whole or in parts.” He took a very strict con­ structionist view of the U.N. Charter. There could be no artificial distinction between the atomic bomb and other weapons used by a potential aggressor (this was Baruch’s original view, now coming back to haunt him). The Charter gave responsibility to the Security Council (not some new authority) to prevent ag­ gression. There could be no tampering with national sovereignty, one o f the “cornerstones” o f the U.N. To abandon the principle o f the unanim ity o f the 26* ” Boris Izakov, “Bikini,” Pravda, 3 July 1946, quoted in Nogee, Soviet Policy, 62. Nevertheless, the test failed to convey the full threat of atomic weapons. Only two ships went down immediately; even the battleship Nevada, at target zero, re­ mained afloat. The Russian observer Professor Simon Alexandrov, who served on the Russian delegation to the U.N. AEC, merely shrugged his shoulders. “Atom Bomb Exploded over Bikini Fleet; 2 Ships Are Sunk, 19 Damaged out of 73; Blast Force Seems Less than Expected,” New York Times, 1 July 1946. MUnited States Memorandum No. 3, Dealing with the Relations between the Ato­ mic Development Authority and the Organs of the United Nations, Submitted to Sub­ committee No. 1 of the United Nations Atomic Energy Commission, New York, 12 July 1946, “Growth of a Policy,” pp. 160-63.



perm anent members o f the Security Council would be “fatal” (an attack on the independence o f the Soviet Union).** The Russian Rajodlon On the 26th, Gromyko defended the Russian alternative. A convention, he implied, would eliminate the American bomb stockpile so that the United States and the Soviet Union could proceed to “practical steps toward control” on a basis o f equality. There could be no “guarantees” other than “international coopera­ tion.” N ational legislation would punish individuals. Security Council action would apply sanctions against nations. W hen the Brazilian and American dele­ gates both pressed him with references to the seriousness o f atomic weapons as demonstrated by the recent Bikini tests, Gromyko angrily burst out: “I don’t see how one can ask other states blindly to believe in the good intentions o f the United States and to accept the U.S. proposal as regards atomic weapons and at the same tim e to doubt the good intentions o f others.” In this heated atmosphere, political negotiations broke off.“ Could the proposals have been reconciled? W e now know that the Russians were actively pursuing their own atomic energy program. Indeed, they achieved a sustained nuclear reaction five days before the critical vote on the Baruch plan on 30 December,® and there is even evidence that they began mining uranium in Saxony in M ay 1945, well before Potsdam.*4 Their convention would not have hindered this program except for the final production o f bombs. N ot would it have interfered with the American program except to require the destruction o f existing bomb stockpiles. The ores, piles, plants, labs, and fissionable m ateri­ als were technically exem pt The international authority proposed by the Ameri­ cans, however, would have terminated the Russian program, as a sm all army o f controllers, inspectors, licensers, and researchers fanned out across the country, while the Americans would have been allow ed to retain and even add to their bomb stockpile until the last stage. “In time in America,” Gromyko rem arked 4*1 41 Ibid., pp. 81-85. The second test also had a disastrous effect on public opinion. The battleship Arkansas and carrier Saratoga were sunk, but only because the atomic bomb was exploded in water beneath them, and the water column rose only a mile, not the two to five predicted by the press. The Times 's science reporter William L. Law­ rence, who witnessed the tests, was “amazed” on his return to the States. “Before Bi­ kini the world stood in awe of this new cosmic force.... Since Bikini this feeling of awe has largely evaporated and has been supplemented by a sense of relief that the atomic bomb is, after all, just another weapon.” “Atomic Bomb Sinks Battleship and Carrier; Four Submarines Are Lost in Mounting Toll; Soviet Flatly Rejects Baruch Control Plan,” New York Times, 25 July 1946; “The Bikini Tests and Public Opinion,” Bulletin o f the Atomic Scientists, September 1946, p. 2. ® “Growth of a Policy,” pp. 81-85. 491. N. Golovin, William H. Doughterty, trans., /. V. Kurchatov: A Socialist-Re­ alist Biography o f the Soviet Nuclear Scientist (Selbstverlag Press, P.O. Drawer 606, Bloomington, IN 47401, 1968), 48-49, 55, 64. The Russian atomic bomb program began in Kazan in May 1942. Ibid., 40. 44 Herken, Winning Weapon, 394, n. 29. Cf. Golovin, 47.

Th* Darudi Plan for the International Gonfroi of Atomic Energy


in August 1946, “your plan w ill be seen to be unfair."0

World Federate Analysis The proposal immediately to exchange scientific information could have been a m aneuver to acquire U.S. atomic secrets. Yet virtually all atom ic scientists denied there were any scientific secrets, and technical secrets had been generally released in the published Smyth report* * In fa c t scientific and technical m atters w o e the least of the problems o f the negotiators, on which they soon reached unanim ity. The destruction o f the American stockpile o f atom ic bombs was a sticking p o in t Judging by the Bikini experience, this was one point on which the Unit­ ed States m ight have budged. Destroying the bombs or postponing the tests m ight have been enough o f an extra good-faith gesture to move the Russians to more serious consideration of the authority. The scientists were quick to observe that the danger was not in the bombs but in the plants and materials*7—a point that the Russians themselves emphasized.** W e now know that the num ber o f bombs in the American “stockpile” was 12.** Could not 12 bombs have been sacrificed for the elimination o f war? On the other hand, the U nited States had already made a m ajor good-faith gesture in the offer itself to surrender its atom ic pow er to an international au­ thority, on condition o f adequate safeguards. A like offer could not be found in all o f national history. Even the timing of the Americans’ stages was privately planned to be only four to six years.70 Could not six years o f American atom ic diplomacy have been endured to place atomic energy in the service o f humanity? If the Russians had dared, they could have been more receptive to an international control scheme, as they had been in the 1920s.71 Russian refusal to countenance the abolition o f the veto was as understand­ able as American refusal to destroy the stockpile. Both w o e shaky props o f na­ tional defense. The veto was one point on which the U .S.S.R. could have budged. By upholding so rigidly the principle o f great power sovereignty, the Russians were really defending the founding principle o f the League o f Nations, which had failed them so disastrously in 1938, and they were Mocking reform of the United Nations, whose league structure had been proved inadequate by 1946. “ Quoted in Herken, Winning Weapon, 178. * Henry Dewolf Smyth, Atomic Energy fo r Military Purposes: The Official Report on the Development o f the Atomic Bomb under the Auspices o f the United States Government, 1940-1945 (Princeton, [12 August] 1945). ** Eugene Rabinowitch, Editorial, Bulletin o f the Atomic Scientists, July 1946, p. 24. * Memo [on Meeting with A. A. Sobolev] by Franklin A. Lindsay, 21 October 1946, Foreign Relations, 1946, 1: 956. * Herken, Winning Weapon, 197. MGroves to Hancock, 16 August 1946, Foreign Relations. 1946, 1: 880. n U.S. Department of State, The U.S.S.R. and Disarmament, 1921-1932, August 1946, Baruch Papers, 56.



On the other hand, the American proposal to abolish the veto only in cases o f national violation o f international atomic energy rules—leaving the veto in tact for larger questions of aggression—was certainly unfair and unwise. W ithout a veto, the Soviet Union would have been exposed to the “majority” in the Securi­ ty Council then effectively within the sphere o f influence o f the United States. Council action according to the confederal rules o f the U.N. would mean w ar. Acheson understood this, and so did Gromyko. Yet retaining a veto ova* general questions was no solution, for any atomic dispute could hardly not escalate in to a general one, and then the U.N. would be paralyzed as before. The proposal o f national enforcem ent versus that o f U.N. sanctions w ithout protection o f veto was a real impasse. W ithout organs o f world law to reach in ­ dividual violators, how could international control of atomic energy really w ork? Only national leaders were apt to be guilty o f clandestine atomic arm am ent T he Russian proposal would have national law enforcement agents arrest national ex­ ecutives (Stalin, Truman) whose chief duty was enforcem ent o f the law. The American would have the U.N. apply sanctions, ultim ately including war, against a whole nation whose leaders were arming it with atomic weapons. Baruch said little m ore in the m onths to come about “punishm ent on the principles applied at Nuremberg,” and Gromyko never elaborated on how the “system of sanctions” he contem plated would apply in a case o f “crime against humanity.” Actually, the Baruch plan was the more dangerous for the security o f the U.S., for it would have allow ed a combination in the Security Council to decide to make war on the United States. This was hardly a “formula o f lasting peace.” Neither propo­ sal went far enough toward world law.

Tho Gold War The rem ainder o f the negotiations followed the fam iliar pattern o f the devel­ oping Cold W ar. Grenville Clark predicted that the “impasse” held “the elements o f a great tragedy.” The issue over sovereignty, “the modification o f which is o f the essence o f the American proposal,” was the cause, he said. Clark urged un­ derstanding of Russian history, an end to the “shocking m utual recrim inations” in the press, avoidance o f the appearance o f atomic coercion, and a new spirit o f “mutual toleration.” 71 Baruch during negotiations remained tolerant, but he was glum. In case o f failure, he muttered, all must be prepared to say, “Good M orn­ ing, D eath.”71* M ost W estern diplom ats, including George Kennan, were con­ vinced the Russians were engaged in a program o f delay rather than natural hesi­ tation over the revolutionary proposals put before them.74 W hen the Soviets formally objected to W estern air and naval bases maintained outside of occupied Germany and Japan, the reaction in the State Department was: “Obviously pro” Clark et al. to Editor, New York Times, 18 August 1946. n Notes on Meeting, 20 August 1946, Foreign Relations, 1946, 1: 884. MFrederick H. Osborn, “The Russians Delay Action on Atomic Control,” Wash­ ington Post, 3 August 1947; reprinted in the Bulletin o f the Atomic Scientists, Octo­ ber 1947, pp. 299-300.

Th» Bamdı Plan for İh» International Control of Atomic Energy


paganda.”” Soon the Soviets introduced a general conventional and atom ic disarm am ent proposal in the U.N. General Assembly that fairly matched whatever propaganda value there may have been in the Americans’ proposal in the U.N. AEC to sur­ render their atomic monopoly to an international atomic authority. Baruch com­ plained bitterly that his advice to include the whole scope o f w ar in the U.S. {dan had not been followed, for now the Russians had seized the initiative.7* The So­ viet proposal called for disclosure o f all Allied forces still abroad, apparently to prove the extent o f W estern imperialism; this formula was deceptive, since Rus­ sia’s extended troops could technically be said to be within the home territory or in that of form er belligerents. D isclosure o f the size o f the American stockpile was also threatened.77 For months, the State Department was intensely preoccu­ pied with meeting this Soviet challenge.71 A Showdown with the Soviets By Septem ber 1946, the U.N. AEC negotiations were only a “sideshow” compared to State’s maneuverings,7* and Baruch decided to seek a “showdown” vote with the Soviets.*0 No compromise was possible because the U.S. plan represented the “minimum” for effective control.11 A t this moment there occurred the dispute between Baruch and Secretary o f Commerce Henry W allace over the plan, w hich resulted in W allace’s dism issal from the cabinet. The old New D ealer raised fundam ental criticism of American foreign policy. A part from ” Johnson to Byrnes, 29 August 1946, ibid., 1: 893; Position Paper, ... with Re­ gard to Regulation of Armaments, 5 September 1946, ibid., 1: 899-902. ” Baruch to Byrnes, 8 December 1946, ibid., 1: 1089-90. ” Notes o f Informal Meeting, 24 July 1946, ibid., 1: 869; Hiss to Acheson, 19 November 1946, ibid., 1: 1019. " British Embassy to State, 23 October 1946, ibid., 1: 962-63; Acheson to Byrnes, 26 October 1946, ibid., 1: 966-69. * Notes of Meeting, 10 September 1946, ibid., 1: 907. Acheson became openly opposed: ‘T alk of enforcement is really paper talk.... The peace forces envisaged in the Charter would be no good against a major power.... Baruch, by his emphasis on enforcement, had gotten us into an insoluble problem.” Memo of Conversation [be­ tween Acheson and Baruch] by John C. Ross, 2 November 1946, ibid., 1: 984. MBaruch to TYuman, 17 September 1946, ibid., 1: 924; Memo of Conversation [between Acheson and Baruch] by John C. Ross, 2 November 1946, ibid., 1: 987-88. Strange new arguments began to be heard about why the U.S. could not cease manu­ facturing atomic bombs. Cessation would adversely affect U.S. security at a time of demobilization, would erode the Allies’ sense of security, would make the U.S. appear belligerent if manufacture had to be resumed, and would weaken the U.S. bargaining position for international control. The gesture would be “utterly ineffective.” This seems to have been the first appearance of the argument, in strategic arms limitation talks, that we must build up in order to build down. Tolman to Hancock, 4 October 1946, ibid., 1: 952; Memo by Hancock, 21 November 1946, ibid., 1: 1034. “ Notes of a Meeting between the United States Delegates to the Atomic Energy Commission and the United States Representatives on the Military Staff Committee, 22 August 1946. ibid., 1: 889.



some err ors o f detail (he put the stage o f atomic secret disclosure last instead o f first), W allace vividly showed that continuing the atom ic buildup, developing the 10,000-m ile-range B -36, and acquiring strategic bases all around the globe were undermining Russian tru st M oreover, the American stand on the veto w as “completely irrelevant” because enforcem ent by the Security Council could only mean w ar.” But such were the fear and fixity o f mind a t the time that all th a t such opinions earned W allace was the charge of “Red.”“ National action, especially national m ilitary action, was so ingrained a m en­ tal fram ework that there was rarely a thought, East or W est, o f supranational peacekeeping. There were a few hopeful signs—the Russian A. A. Sobolev, o n Gromyko’s team, recognized the Baruch plan as a proposal of “world govern­ ment,"** John Foster Dulles briefly advocated an “international law that operated on individuals,”“ and Foreign M inister M olotov was “conciliatory” in D ecem ber about the veto issue (the Security Council veto would apply only to the rules o f the ADA, not to its day-to-day operations).“ But when the U.S. plan cam e id a vote on 30 December 1946, even Baruch expressly admitted that enforcement un­ der the plan m eant “war”: “L et all nations that w illingly set their pens to th e term s o f this treaty realize that its willful breech means punishment and, if nec­ essary, war. Then we w ill not lightly have breeches and evasions.” The vote was 10-2-0, the Russians and Poles abstaining. Although this was not an a b ­ solute rejection, and though negotiations continued until M ay 1948, the spirit o f good faith had gone out of the talks.*771*

" Henry A. Wallace, Madison Square Garden Speech, 12 September 1946, reprint­ ed in idem. The Fight fo r Peace (New York, 1946), 17-22: Wallace to Truman, 24 July 1946, New York Times, 18 September 1946; Bernard Baruch, “Memorandum to th e President,” 24 September 1946, Bulletin o f the Atomic Scientists, October 1946, pp. 4-5, 31. MMemo by Hancock, 19 September 1946, Foreign Relations, 1946, 1: 933. “ Memo [on Meeting with A. A. Sobolev] by Franklin A. Lindsay, 21 O ctober 1946, ibid., 1: 956, 960. “ Minutes of the United States Delegation [to the United Nations], 15 November 1946, ibid., 1: 541-43. MMemo of Conversation [with the Turkish ambassador] by Robert McClintock, 4 December 1946, ibid., 1: 1084; Memo by Naval Representative to Army and A ir Force Representatives on the Military Staff Committee, 5 December 1946, ibid., 1: 1087-88. 17 “Proceedings of the UN Atomic Energy Commission,” Bulletin o f the Atom ic Scientists, January 1947, pp. 12-13; State, “Policy at the Crossroads,” 54-55. Later it was admitted that Baruch hurried the vote to avoid the “census of armaments” re­ quired under the General Assembly’s disarmament resolution of 14 December. Edward A. Shils, “The Failure of the UNAEC: An Interpretation,” Bulletin o f the Atomic Sci­ entists, July 1948, p. 206.

11 U.N. Reform os the Baruch Plan Foiled We sit here and feel the United Nations tremble. We watch it fail to meet forcefully the great issues of our time. We know in our hearts that its structure is faulty. We know that therefore no nation—yes, no nation, great or small—trusts the United Nations to provide its security and peace. —Carlos P. Romulo, Philippines Delegate, Speech in the U.N. General Assembly, 13 December 1946

, Clark's Continued UK Reform Effort M ean w h ile, Grenville Clark was trying to follow up the opening o f the U.N. AEC negotiations with further approaches to the General Assembly in order to open debate on “radical amendment o f the Charter." He was still circulating the D ublin petition. Clark thought it would soon be evident that the Baruch propo­ sals could not be carried out without such am endm ent He hoped that the ques­ tion on the Baruch proposal would not be called quickly since Russia’s fear and suspicion for some tim e were sure to end in a No vote. C lark wrote to W ash­ ington colum nist and foreign policy com m entator Edgar Ansel M owrer, who was in touch with A ustralia’s H erbert Evatt and some o f the other U.N. dele­ gates, to discuss tactics. Clark suggested the calling o f a "joint conference com­ m ittee” o f the Atomic Energy Commission, G en u al Assembly, and Security Council. M owrer thought the idea should be passed to the sympathetic delega­ tions "ju st as a suggestion, " so it would seem to be "their idea.” Their idea was to lead to the Assembly debate in November and December 1946.1 Visit to Byrnes C lark wrote tw ice to Secretary o f State Jam es Byrnes, explaining that the U .S. proposal o f 14 June 1946 implied “lim ited world government,’’ and he sug­ gested that amendment was preferable to treaty to relate the Atomic Development A uthority to the United Nations. Clark added: “It will be wise not to perm it ac­ ceptance o f the American plan to come to a Yes or No issue at an early date. If this were done, it is likely that Russia w ill refuse, precipitating a breach that it is vitally im portant to avoid.” Then on 24 July, B oston's H airy B. Cabot, Alan 1 Clark to Mowrer, 6 July 1946, Baker library, Clark Papers, 13.3.



Crans too, T. K. Fin letter, and C alifornia representative Jerry Voorhis w a it to see Byrnes. They urged him to support the Charter amendments. They cam e away with the grim impression that there was already a “very bad impasse on th e atomic energy m atter,” and that “our Government has not got any good construc­ tive plan for solving it.”1 AFoIr Chora* Clark then prepared a letter for the Times over the signatures o f seven m em ­ bers o f the Dublin committee, which appeared a few days after the U.N. AEC d e­ cision to suspend meetings. “The present impasse in the Atomic Energy C om ­ mission holds, it seems dear, the elements of a great tragedy,” he began. H e re ­ hearsed the main points in the American and Russian plans that culm inated in the issue over sovereignty, “the m odification o f which is o f the essence o f th e American proposals.” Then he warned:1 Unless, therefore, this impasse is broken, nothing less than a great arma­ ment race, not only in atomic bombs, but in all other weapons, is impend­ ing. Experience shows that such a race would, at best, involve almost intol­ erable tension, and, at the worst, war.

C lark him self proposed a constructive alternative policy for the governm ent —his Charter amendment plan. He went over the recent history o f Russia’s b e­ ing outvoted in Assembly and Council (admission of Argentina, failed censure o f Franco, ouster from Iran), which explained why she held on to die veto as a p ro ­ tection. However, a popularly representative Assembly, reform ed on the “fair” principle o f weighted representation and o f voting by individuals, would g iv e Russia a fair chance. A representative General Assembly would perm it the U nit­ ed Nations to begin to function as a lim ited world government, Clark argued. H e proposed a U.N. committee along the lines o f his letter to M owrer. He clo sed with a plea for a “cessation of the shocking mutual recrim inations between R us­ sia and the United States, as reflected in the press of both countries.”

1 Clark to Byrnes, 23 July 1946, Clark Papers, 15.1; Clark to Stimson, 30 Ju ly 1946, ibid., 21.10. Finletter was still having his differences with Clark and coining off the worse for them. The Americans United director thought that the adm inistra­ tion intended to reject the Baruch proposal on the veto and go back to the veto-safe Acheson-Lilienthal Report. Hence, the movement should fight for the Baruch plan without “diverting attention” by proposals to develop it with reforms of the G eneral Assembly on the principle of weighted representation. Finletter added, too, strange­ ly, that the movement should de-emphasize “institutional elements in world govern­ ment" and make the principle of disarmament “part of the law.” Who was the greater realist? Finletter to Clark, 1 August 1946, ibid., 21.10. * Clark et al. to Editor, New York Times, 18 August 1946, p. E8. The letter w as signed by Douglas Arant, Henry B. Cabot, Clark, Alan Cranston, and F. R. von W indegger, dated 13 August 1946.

U.N. Reform os tho Bauch Plan Faded


Foderaksts' Aloofness fo Carte's Effort The world government movement in the summer of 1946 never generally ap­ preciated the opportunity presented by the Baruch plan for beginning the practical political approach to world governm ent W orld Federalists heard o f Clark, Mowrer, and Cranston’s approach to Cuba, whose delegate took the initiative to place on the agenda for the upcoming session o f the U.N. General Assembly a conference to elim inate the veto privilege. Tom Griessem er thought the move “useless” and “senseless.” W hat was needed, he wrote, was a “M ajority Rule W orld Legislature,” which was exactly w hat Clark was proposing. Two months later, when the thoroughgoing nature o f the Clark proposals behind the Cuban initiative had become evident, G riessem er at last urged support Americans U nited fell back on their laurels after winning U.S. qualified adherence to the W orld Court on 1 A ugust They began gearing up for a 13-w eek radio series on the ABC Network entitled The World Security Workshop, to start in November. The first installm ent “Citizen Delevan,” was about an atom ic scientist whose conscience conflicted with security regulations. Scripts, documentary or dramat­ ic, were invited from the public for a $250 prize. Student Federalists were pre­ paring for their big Chicago institute and convention.4

Qmax of U.N. Reform Efforts M eanwhile, the private efforts o f Grenville Clark and others to bring about a general conference of the United Nations to amend the Charter were teaching a clim ax. There were three resolutions on the agenda o f die General Assembly pointing the way. The m ost “drastic” was the first o f two introduced by the del­ egate from Cuba, Dr. Guillermo Belt (drafted by Clark): [Resolved:] To convene in conformity with Article 109 of the Charter a General Conference of the Members of the United Nations for the purpose of reviewing the present Charter of the Organization. The said Conference should be held at the same place as the second session of the General Assem­ bly in 1947 and should begin work immediately after the conclusion of the Assembly.

This clear resolution, worded to make evasion im possible and to transform the second session of the Assembly into a great preparatory conference, at no tim e had “a chance o f winning more than a handful o f votes,” observed Alan Cranston, who managed the campaign. It was too drastic a step for the “very first” Assembly to take. Later, delegates said, this step m ight be taken, “if the

4 “Slay That Dragon: Veto,” World Government News, August 1946, pp. 2-4; “The Conference No One Can Veto,” ibid., October 1946, p. 1; “World Security W orkshop,” ibid., September 1946, p. 6; Gehman to Balderston, 16 September 1946; ABC Press Release, 14 November 1946, Regenstein Library, AORES Papers, 8.9. ABC donated all but $8,000 of the $450,000 air time.



workings o f the Security Council are not soon improved.”5 The second Cuban resolution (also drafted by d a rk ) was: [Resolved:] To appoint a special committee composed of representatives o f all Members of the United Nations which, before 1 February 1947, express their desire to serve on the committee ... to consider and report to the General Assembly what amendments would make the United Nations a more effective instrument to maintain world peace and security, and to invite the organs and agencies of the United Nations and interested official and private organiza­ tions to submit to the committee their observations and proposals.

This fall-back resolution, more than a m ere “study” resolution, won “substan­ tially m ore support” in the ensuing debate. A t one time, when the disarm am ent debate was bogged down, it seemed to have a chance for approval.* * The third resolution was a very “mild” one, introduced by Australia, around which m ost o f the discontent of the small nations with the veto revolved. D ele­ gates o f over 30 nations criticized the veto as exercised to date in the Security Council, but in the end they dared to approve the Australian resolution, only “much amended” and “much watered down.” A t the last moment, even the clause to use the w ord “veto” in this m ild censure was excised (here enclosed in brackets): THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. MINDFUL of the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Na­ tions, and having taken notice of the divergencies which have arisen in re­ gard to the application and interpretation of Article 27 of the Charter, [CONSIDERS that, in some instances, the use and the threatened use o f such power of veto have not been in keeping either with the general purposes and principles of the Charter or with the understanding of the United Nations Conference on International Organization held at San Francisco, and] THEREFORE, EARNESTLY REQUESTS the permanent members of the Security Council to make every effort, in consultation with one another and with fellow members of the Security Council, to ensure that the use of the special voting privilege of its permanent members does not impede the Se­ curity Council in reaching decisions promptly.

The campaign for votes for either this A ustralian censure or the C uban re­ view committee, Cranston remarked, was exactly like that to get a bill through a state legislature or Congress. “Votes were won or lost, traded and traded in , for important and relevant or unimportant and irrelevant reasons.”7

1 Alan Cranston, The Campaign for World Government at the General Assembly, 23 October, 15 December 1946, pp. 1-2, Clark Papers, 15.3; Clark to Holliday, 19 September 1946, ibid., 21.10. Eight nations (of 36 needed) in the end voted Yes. * Ibid. Twelve nations eventually approved the committee. ’ Campaign for World Government, pp. 2-3, 5.

U.N. Kafam os the Bauch Plan Fated


Carlos P. Romulo The debate brought out the im portant and relevant reasons. Three speeches by the Philippine delegate, General Carlos P. Romulo, were generally accorded to have been the strongest for the three resolutions and indeed for world govern­ m en t The speeches deserve to be remembered, for they marked a historical turn­ ing point in the fate o f the United Nations and still show a way into the future. Carlos Romulo was educated at the University o f the Philippines and a t Col­ um bia in New York. He rapidly rose in newspaper publishing in M anila during the 1930s, earning his first honorary doctor of laws degree (from Notre Dame) in 1935 and Pulitzer Prize in 1941. During the war, he served as General M acArthur’s aide-de-cam p on Bataan, Corregidor, and Australia, rising rapidly to the rank in the U.S. Army o f colonel (later brigadier general). In 1944 he became secretary o f information in President Quezon’s exile Philippine governm ent in W ashington. Romulo rejoined M acArthur for the liberation of Leyte and M ani­ la, represented his country at the San Francisco conference, and headed the Phil­ ippine delegation to the United Nations thereafter.'

UN. General Assembly Debate on Atomic Energy The General Assembly reopened at Flushing Meadows, New York. President Truman appeared the first day, 23 October 1946, and set forth two great goals for the second session—the international control o f atomic energy and general disar­ mament. He declared that success would require “setting fundamental precedents in the law o f nations.’” As atomic energy was the province o f the U.N. ABC, which was then holding its inform al discussions, the Assembly took up the question o f regulation and reduction of armaments other than atomic. Another question, not raised by the United States but being discussed in the aisles and lounges, was review o f the entire Charter, especially the veto, as occasioned by the Cuban and Australian initiatives on the agenda.

Molotov's Speed* on the Atomic Bomb Six days into the session, V. M. M olotov appeared to initiate debate on gen­ eral disarmament. His speech was not lim ited to weapons o f m ass destruction other than atomic, and it expressed the full range o f Russian political objections to the U.S. plan. The “m onopolistic possession of the atom ic bomb” was said to be a “threat to the peace." The Baruch plan for control gave only “an appear­ ance of international character” while it really protected “in a veiled form the mo­ nopolistic position o f the United States.” Its provisions, said M olotov, were based on “a narrow conception of the interests of wie country." Abolition o f the veto was “an inadmissible denial of the equality of states and their legitim ate in­ terests.” To “upset the United Nations Charter” (abolish the veto) was “to give a free hand to the worshipers o f the atomic bomb” (leave Russia to the mercy o f • Philippine Mission to the United Nations, Ambassador Carlos P. Romulo, n.d., c. June 1949, Lilly Library. UWF Papers, 32. ' “The Discussion in the UN Assembly,” Bulletin o f the Atomic Scientists, No­ vember 1946, p. 18.



the U.S .-dom inated “majority”). There could be no diminution o f sovereignty, as Baruch was proposing. M olotov left an unmistakable impression o f how the Russian people regarded the threat o f atom ic bombs, which had first been used by the Americans on Japanese civilians.10

U5. RMponsn to Molotov's Spoodt In the United States, this speech caused much offense. Even the atom ic sci­ entists called it "vicious” and "wildly exaggerated.” Indeed, it takes much dose reading o f the U.S. proposals and of Baruch’s eloquent speeches to see, as Clark and others pointed out, that nothing was proposed there accept abolition o f the veto in cases involving atomic energy—and that little made effectively nugatory by State D epartm ent qualifications. The U.S. did not propose effective atomic control, let alone the abolition o f war. Shortly before the M olotov speech, the National Council o f Soviet-A m erican Friendship had endorsed, as a sign o f good faith, U.S. cessation o f stockpil­ ing atomic bombs (adding that they hoped the Soviets would be more responsive on the issue o f controls). On the 29th it was reported in the press that form er Public W orks Administration head Harold L. Ickes had promptly resigned from the council in protest American labor split. The Congress of Industrial Organ­ izations at its Atlantic City convention also resolved to end the stockpiling. The American Federation o f Labor in Chicago approved the Baruch plan, "condemn­ ing Communists at home and abroad.” 11 Even the informed public were uncer­ tain where to turn.

Romukk RepieswieSIve Assembly Needed Shortly after the Cuban resolutions were first presented to the A ssem bly's full Political and Security Committee, Romulo made a m ajor address on 16 No­ vember 1946. He took the floor to answer a charge by Russia’s Andrei Vishinsky (who had joined M olotov for the Assembly debate on disarmament) that the small nations supporting the resolutions were "ungrateful” for the W orld W ar II victory “handed th a n by the Big Five.” Romulo defended the part played by the Philippine people, recalled that at San Francisco both the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. had demanded the veto, and argued that, because of the veto, the Security Council “can do virtually nothing in moments o f real crisis.” W hat, Vishinsky had asked, could replace the veto? Romulo then sketched several proposals, which included 71*

MIbid., pp. 18-19. » “Baruch and Hancock Defend the American Plan,” ibid., pp. 20-23; Ickes, New York Tunes, 29 October 1946; CIO, New York Tunes, 20 November 1946; AFL, PM, 17 October 1946. On the day of M olotov's speech, Baruch team member Ferdinand Eberstadt went as far as any of them toward world government. He answered a report­ er: “World government may be the only final solution to the problems of interna­ tional relations.... [But] the goal is a long way off.” “Baruch and Hancock Defend the American Plan,” p. 23.

U.N. Reform os the Bauch Plan Failed


C laik’s:” There are many who believe the General Assembly must be turned into a leg­ islative body with limited powers before peace can be assured. There are oth­ ers who propose the creation of a world bicameral legislature. Some feel that representation should be based upon population, others that there must be a system called “functional representation.” More and more people the world over are coming to support what is known as “weighted representation.”

Romulo gave a sm all-nation slant on the "fundam ental w eakness" o f the Charter, which was not the veto ("the power not to do anything”) but the one nation, one vote rule. Such a rule may be "pleasing" to sm all states like the Philippines, Romulo joked, but it “prevents the G reat Powers from according the Assembly any power to enact binding world law.” The United States, with a population o f 140 m illion, was not going to subm it to the enactments o f an As­ sembly in which she was represented equally with the Philippines, whose popu­ lation was 18 m illion! “As a spokesman for a small nation,” he concluded, *Tny nation would be very happy indeed to trade the fiction o f equality in a powerless Assembly for the reality o f a vote equal to our actual position in the world in an Assembly endowed with real pow er.... W hat is needed is a narrow ly lim ited W orld Fédéral G overnm ent"”

Romulo: Tbming from the UN. bock to Powur Potties W hile the Assembly’s Political and Security Committee was debating disar­ m am ent which it did from 28 November to 13 December 1946, Romulo made a second speech in the subcommittee, which was getting itself tied up in knots over the Cuban and Australian resolutions. He spoke plainly o f the indecision and impotence then becoming m anifest in the U nited N ations. W hat was hap­ pening, Romulo asserted, was that nations were turning from the UJN., as com­ mon protector of their peoples from war, to “those obsolete m ethods that have never, never, in the long run, succeeded in keeping the peace: pow er politics, and powerful arms and armies.” Again he rehearsed the reforms necessary to give “real authority” to the U.N. The one nation, one vote rule makes it possible for the vote o f the Soviet Union to be “neutralized” by the vote o f Iceland; the vote o f the United States to be "overwhelmed" by the vote o f Iceland and Luxembourg. The Soviet Union uses the veto openly because in the Assembly it is in a minority position “out o f all proportion to its actual pow er and prestige in the world.” The U nited States uses the veto covertly, as in its “present monopoly position with relation u Carlos P. Romulo, “Statement ... before Committee I—Political and Security Committee," 16 November 1946, Regenstein Library, World Republic Papers. " Cranston claimed that “Romulo delivered our address word for word exactly as I typed it,” except for increasing the population of the Philippines from 16 million (a figure Cranston got from the World Almanac) to 18 million! Romulo’s second and third speeches, however, seem to be from his own hand. Cranston to Clark, 17 No­ vember 1946, Clark Papers, 15.1.



to the atom bom b.” The Philippine delegation, Romulo repeated, would vote for the Cuban proposals.14* The first Cuban proposal—to call a General Conference under Article 109— would have required a tw o-thirds vote of the Assembly plus any 7 o f the dim 11 members o f the Security Council; the second—to set up a study committee—a sim ple m ajority in the Assembly. In the Security Council, the alignm ent origi­ nally seemed to be as follows. Pro: Holland, Australia, M exico, Brazil; con: U .S., U .S.S.R., Poland, France; uncertain: England, Egypt, China. Cranston observed that m ost delegates felt that England and hence Egypt would end up in the con group, and that the U.S. would pull M exico and Brazil into the opposi­ tion, too. M oscow was firmly opposed, seeing an “occult power'’ behind die in­ itiative o f a state presumably so close within the American sphere o f in terest19

PoMddng In the Assembly In the Assembly the votes were m ore uncertain. That was where the m ost “trading” was done, as Cranston put i t with the second Cuban proposal in view. The Dutch delegate, J. H. Van Roijen, recognized the special rights o f the Big Five because o f “their greater contributions to the common cause,” but he thought the veto w ent beyond “reasonable bounds.” A system o f weighted vot­ ing would be more reasonable to him. M. F. Van Langenhove o f Belgium spoke out in favor o f m ajority rule, “this m ajority being in good time calculated in re­ lation to the relative importance o f states.” Alexandre Parodi of France, though opposed, reminded delegates o f France’s constitutional provision for entering a supranational organization. China’s W ellington Koo echoed his country’s view at San Francisco that sovereignty must be diminished. Sir Hartley Shawcross of B ritain in another debate m entioned his hope that the U.N. m ight becom e a “W orld Parliament.” But he then went on to oppose U.N. intervention in South­ w est A frica on the grounds that the U.N. was not a world government. Even W arren Austin o f the United States let slip a remarie, during discussion o f a site for the perm anent U.N. headquarters, that he hoped the site would be that o f an eventual world government.16*

Final Vota on FWsokitkxu to Col a Review Gonforenc» But in general the United States and G reat Britain were, “paradoxically,” as “ Carlos P. Romulo, Speech No. 2 ... before Sub-committee II of Committee I, 4 December 1946, ibid., 1S.3. The record of the Soviet Union on its use of the veto to the end of 1946 was as follows: veto of U.S. resolution on withdrawal of foreign troops in Syria-Lebanon case, 16 February 1946; four vetoes in Spanish case, 25-26 June 1946; three vetoes on memberships of Trans-Jordan, Portugal, and Ireland, 29 August 1946; veto of resolution to appoint commission to investigate Greek border situation, 20 September 1946. Use of the Veto by the U.S.S.R. in Public Meetings of the Security Council, UWF Reference and Research Branch Memo, 14 August 1950, UWF Papers, 68.US-Russian Relations. 11 Cranston to Clark, 17 October 1946; Clark to Cranston, 30 October 1946, Clark papers, 15.1. MCampaign for World Government, pp. 2-4.

IM lUform es ttw Bcwch Plon Feritod


many observed, as hostile to abolition o f the veto in the debates on the Cuban proposals as they were violent in attacking it in those on disarm am ent and ato­ m ic energy. The sm all nations, generally favorable in private, would not vote against the great powers for revision o f the Charter—“not now." The final vote on the study committee in the Political and Security Committee was as follows: YES


1. Argentina* 2. Australia 3. Bolivia* 4. Brazil 5. Colombia 6. Cuba* 7. Dominican R.1* 8. Egypt 9. El Salvador* 10. Honduras* 11. New Zealand* 12. Philippines*

1. Afghanistan 2. Belgium 3. Chile 4. China 5. Iran 6. Luxembourg 7. Mexico 8. Turkey 9. Venezuela

* Also voted for General Conference N Probable no vote if present Y Probable yes vote if present



N 1. Costa Rica 1. Byelorussia 2. Denmark N 2. Czech. 3. France N 3. Ecuador 4. Canada 7 4. Ethiopia 5. Greece ? 5. Guatemala Y 6. Haiti 6. India ? 7. Iceland 7. Netherlands 8. Nicaragua Y 8 . Iraq Y 9. Lebanon 9. Norway 10. Panama Y 10. Liberia 11. Peru Y 11. Paraguay ? 12. Uruguay 12. Poland N 13. S. Africa 13. S. Arabia 14. Sweden 15. Syria 16. Ukraine 17. U.K 18. U.S.A 19. U.S.S.R 20. Yugoslavia

The vote came at a hastily called Sunday meeting (8 December 1946). Some not present were caught unawares, others deliberately stayed away, not to go on record. Note that China abstained. Also that M exico and Brazil resisted the Co­ lossus o f the North. Egypt bucked England, but Holland went over to the oppo­ sition. Only Argentina’s vote was understood to be anti-Soviet. As there was no m ajority, Ambassador Belt did not request a vote in plenary session o f the Assembly. For the future, Cranston thought the key was the attitude o f the United States toward revision, since “nation after nation looked to us for leader­ ship."”

First Disarmament Debate M eanwhile, the debate on disarmam ent in the Political and Security Com­ m ittee had reached a seemingly opposite conclusion. Both the Soviet Union and the United States made concessions to one another. M olotov for the first tim e used the code word “inspection" in his proposals. He clarified the Russian posi17 Ibid., pp. 5-6. The press took little note of this historic effort to revise the Charter, overshadowed by the general disarmament debate. Without great power lead­ ership, the vote on the abolition of the veto was a “non-event.”



lion lhat die general disannam ent and atomic control commissions (finally u n it­ ed in his resolution) should function under the Security Council, which was su b ­ je c t to the unanim ity rule or veto. Unanimity, M olotov explained, would be re ­ quired only for the “decision on the reduction of armaments, including the prohi­ bition o f atom ic weapons and the establishm ent o f control commissions”—n o t for the day-to-day “work” o f the commissions. The United States also made a significant concession when the American d e l­ egate agreed to the Soviet proposal that the control commission should not d e­ rive its authority from a treaty or convention outside the U.N. but from th e Charter. A final compromise provided, rather strangely if suggestively, fo r an “international sy stem ... within the framework o f the Security Council," w hose legal instrum ent would be a “convention" between nations.1*

Gark» Romuto's Speech on Doing the UK. to Death Then, on 13 December 1946, the day before the final vote on the disarm a­ m ent resolution, Carlos Romulo rose before all the principal delegates and before packed galleries o f the plenary session of the General Assembly to make h is third speech. “I rub my eyes, and wonder where I am ," he said on recounting U.N. debates on disarmam ent and voting rules; “I listen, and cannot believe m y ears." Romulo began by recalling the presumption that they were all there “to create conditions o f everlasting peace." He referred back to the San Francisco conference, where “at the insistence o f the United States, the Soviet Union, an d the United Kingdom, a provision virtually disfranchising well over sixty per c en t o f the people of the world was w ritten into the Charter.” But the small nations w o e told, Take the veto, or there will be no Charter. Then, after use of the atomic bomb, the United States proposed that the v eto should be abolished for the control o f atom ic energy. Senator Connally la te r came to the Assembly to urge abolition o f the veto also for control o f all w ea­ pons o f m ass destruction. “How many people,” the senate» asked, ‘W ould b e in ja il if they had the right o f veto over the sheriff or the judge?" Y et the U nited States voted against both Cuban proposals for immediate or eventual Charter re­ vision. Senator A ustin, also o f the American delegation, stated, “The U nited States is opposed to amendment of A rticle 27 at this time.” Said Romulo: “I cannot understand this. How can the United States denounce the veto one day, and defend the veto the next day? Does the United States know what it wants?” The U nited Kingdom, by comparison, Romulo added, was caught in the sam e contradiction, judging by statements of Shawcross and Bevin. The Soviet U nion, too, agreed to abolition o f the veto in the operation o f the general disannam ent control commission but voted against proposals to amend the Charter to do aw ay with the veto. W hy this inconsistency? Romulo found two answers. The B ig Three were beginning to see that the veto was a “m onstrosity,” preventing all practical action in the United N ations for the control o f modem weapons, b u t they were “afraid to adm it that they made an unforgivable m istake when they in" “Disannament Debate in United Nations General Assembly,” 2S November — 13 December 1946, Bulletin o f the Atomic Scientists, January 1947, pp. 6-8.

UK lUfoim os the Beuch Pbn Fdled


sisted upon a C harin’ containing a veto clause.” O r they covered up their mis­ take with talk of “realism ,” since an attem pt to really elim inate the veto “m ight offend somebody.” He asked, “Is this fair to the United Nations? Is this fair to the people o f the world?” The new organs proposed for peacekeeping were effectively outside the United Nations, he plainly stated." If we adopt this policy, we shall be doing the United Nations to death. If we do this, we shall leave only a shell, a shell to deal with mere trivia. This shell will bear a marked resemblance to the League of Nations, famed for its achievements in such matters as the prevention of international narcotic smuggling, notorious for its failure to prevent world war.

Once m ore Romulo w ent over the arguments for strengthening the U nited Nations by replacing the unanimity rule in the Security Council with a m ajority rule in the General Assembly, reformed to make it representative of peoples. He saw no great obstacle in the competing eco-political systems o f communism, socialism, and capitalism to a federal structure o f world governm ent But what made this speech so significant was his plain statement of the breakup of any ef­ fective superior government over the nation-states and their consequent turn to national programs of m ilitary defense. Romulo was recording the historic end o f the brief hope of basing peace on government. Henceforth the attem pt would be made again to base it on fear. We sit here and feel the United Nations tremble. We watch it fail to meet forcefully the great issues of our time. We know in our hearts that its struc­ ture is faulty. We know that therefore no nation—yes, no nation, great or sm all—trusts the United Nations to provide its security and peace.

He made one last appeal for the Cuban proposals.“

QmoxofUH AEC Negotfctftons, 3 0 Docombnr 1 9 4 6 Events now m oved to a parallel climax in the U.N. Atomic Energy Com­ mission, which we have already sketched in Chapter 10 . The General Assembly passed, unanimously, its disarmament resolution—“Principles Governing Gener­ al Regulation and Reduction o f Armaments”— on 14 December 1946 . The reso-* “ Carlos P. Romulo, Speech No. 3 ... before the General Assembly, 13 December 1946, his emphases, Clark Papers, 15.3. * Ambassador Romulo was honored for his speeches by being presented with the first World Government News Award Medal at a dinner attended by Carl Van Doren, Justice W illiam O. Douglas, Senator Carl A. Hatch, and Lin Yu-tang on 12 March 1947. “By this powerful call,” the award citation read, “the Ambassador lifted into practical international politics an idea to which lesser statesmen have given lip ser­ vice but small public support.” (Also honored with the medals were Emery Reves and E. B. White of the New Yorker.) Carl Van Doren, “The World Government News Award,” World Government News, 1 March 1947.



lution contained language urging dispatch in the U K AEC. The latter, as an o r­ gan o f the Security Council, was not bound to regard the Assembly resolution as more than a recommendation, o f course, but the resolution dearly expressed th e hope o f the nations that international control of atomic and all other weapons o f m ass destruction (now at last united in one control proposal) would be realized, and Bernard Baruch for the United States at least regarded it as a sign of a “new spirit” urging the AEC “to proceed expeditiously to the devdopm ent of a form ula o f action.”“ Baruch pressed im patiently for a vote on the American plan in the form o f the “General Findings and Recommendations” dated 5 Decem ber 1946. O nly three “political” clauses were in dispute:“ The treaty shall provide that the rule of unanimity of the permanent Members, which in certain circumstances exists in the Security Council, shall have no relation to the work of the international agency. No govern­ ment shall possess any right of veto over the fulfillment by die internation­ al control agency of the obligations imposed upon it by the treaty nor shall any government have the power, through exercise of veto or otherwise, to obstruct the course of control or inspection. Once the violations constituting international crimes have been defined and the measures of enforcement and punishment therefore agreed to in the treaty or convention, there shall be no legal right, by veto or otherwise, whereby a willful violator of the terms of the treaty or convention shall be protected from the consequences of violation of its terms. The enforcement and punishment provisions of the treaty or convention would be ineffectual if, in any such situations, they could be rendered nuga­ tory by the veto of a State which had voluntarily signed the treaty.

Baruch: A Brooch Moans War Baruch urged haste, in retrospect in order to reveal Soviet dilatoriness as a ll states began to realign themselves in the emerging Cold W ar. The proposals he claim ed were “generous and just.” They aimed to erect an “international authori­ ty which shall effectively prevent the manufacture and use o f atomic bom bs for w ar purposes and which shall develop the use of atomic energy for social g ain .” They required 'Tull and free international inspection.” They provided “deterrents” and “punishments.”” The time for action is here. Each of us perceives clearly what must be done. We may differ as to detail. We are in accord as to purpose. To the acbieve-1 11 “Proceedings of the UN Atomic Energy Commission,” Bulletin o f the A tom ic Scientists, January 1947, p. 11. The United States drafted the clause urging dispatch in the U.N. AEC. Policy at the Crossroads, 60-63. a Policy o f the Crossroads, 48-51; “First Report of the Atomic Energy Com m is­ sion to the Security Council,” 30 December 1946, Bulletin o f the Atomic Scientists, January 1947, pp. 16-27. MPolicy at the Crossroads, 52-53; “Proceedings,” p. 10.

U.M fteform as the Bauch Plan Faffed


ment of that purpose, I present a programme in the form of a resolution, which has been placed before you.

Except for the American delegation, there was general reluctance to bring m atters quickly to a vote. The U.S.S.R.’s Gromyko pointed out that the Assem­ bly’s disarmam ent resolution, which was being cited to precipitate m atters, was silent on the veto question. He urged that no decision be taken until they could reach “imanımmış agreem ent” Other diplomatic representatives foresaw a nuclear arms race even as they saw immediately a threat o f war. Baruch agreed to a post­ ponement o f a few days before the Christmas holidays.” M eetings o f Commit­ tee 2 (political) were held on the 18th and 19th. The Soviet delegate refused to participate. On the 20th the full ABC m et again, and Gromyko formally asked for six or seven days to study the Baruch resolutions in the light o f the Assem­ bly resolution o f the 14th. This was rejected. On the 27th, Baruch attacked the remaining ambiguity o f the Russian posi­ tion on the veto, if it should be necessary for the control commission “to enforce the obligations o f the treaty.” He admitted that enforcem ent as envisaged in the American proposal m eant “war.” He even urged that the treaty terms make pun­ ishm ent by w ar explicit: Let all nations that willingly set their pens to the terms of this treaty realize that its willful breech means punishment and, if necessary, war. Then we will not lightly have breaches and evasions.

He could not recommend to the people or the Senate o f the United States that they “surrender this potent weapon” and transfer their atomic secrets to a U.N. body—“in the belief that they are outlawing the use o f this weapon for w ar and opening the gates for the uses o f atomic energy for the good o f all mankind— under any system which is open to nullification o f punishment by what can be called a subterfuge.”“

Gromyko on Violation of Charter Then on 30 December 1946, at the plenary meeting to vote the Baruch reso­ lutions, Andrei Gromyko answered in effect that the atom ic energy proposals were not in accord with international realities. The U.S. proposals, said the So­ viet delegate, were “in contradiction with the principles o f the U nited Nations Organization.” The C hart» had given supreme responsibility for the maintenance o f peace and security to the Security Council, while now the United States pro­ posed to set up a new atomic energy control authority in com petition with the Council. The proposals were dangerous to the peace, Gromyko stated. The new authority was not granted “r e a l... powers,” yet the Security Council was to be enabled to apply sanctions, including war, even if not unanimous. The United States was actually proposing “revision o f the Charter” yet had rejected the recent* ** “Proceedings,” pp. 10-12; Policy at the Crossroads, 53-55. ” “Proceedings,” pp. 12-13; Policy at the Crossroads, 54-55.



proposals in tbe Assembly to do so openly. He resented remarks that “only those nations want to protect tbe principle of m anim ity in connection with atom ic en­ ergy control which have an intention o f breaking the treaty on the control.” G ro­ myko pointed out the specific clauses on the veto in the Baruch resolutions that he rejected. He added that the Soviet government was willing to continue dis­ cussions. He returned to the basis of his 19 June proposals, providing for prior destruction o f American atomic weapons as a precondition for establishing “con­ trol and inspection” organs in which “decisions by a majority” should apply “in appropriate cases."1*

İh» Vol» on 30 Dneambur 1946 Grom yko’s reply was in principle constitutional, but it was perceived as evasive—pious references to the Charter already being seen as code for inaction. Baruch m oved to adopt the report finalized by the working committees. O ther delegates seem to have lost patience or to have come to regard the Russians as did the Americans. The vote was as follows:17 YES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

Australia Brazil Canada China Egypt Prance Mexico Netherlands U.K. U.S.A



I . Poland 2. U.S.S.R

Analysis: Inadequate Proposals for Effective International Control It was not clear immediately ju st what had happened. The Soviets and Poles had not voted against the U.S. plan; they had abstained, which seemed to indicate continued willingness to negotiate. But within days Baruch and his whole team resigned, convinced o f “one central fact”—“The Russians would not countenance an effective system o f international control o f nuclear energy.” N evertheless, in the months to come, the Russians would continue to malm m ajor concessions. They had already conceded at least “limited” inspection. On 18 February 1947, Gromyko subm itted 12 amendments, in one o f w hich the code word “management” occurred. On S M arch, in an otherwise violent attack * “Proceedings,” pp. 13-14. ” “Proceedings,” pp. 14-13; Policy o f the Crossroads, S3. Canada, not in 1946 a member of the Security Council, had been brought into the U.N. AEC by special ar­ rangement in recognition of her association with the U.S. and U.K. on tbe atomic bomb project.

U.N. Reform q> the Besuch Plan Faded


on the American plan, he elaborated the new Russian attitude on inspection and m anagem ent On 11 June, he accepted the principle of an international coopera­ tive research organization. But by then even the atomic scientists had run out o f patience. One o f them wrote in the summer of 1947: “It is difficult to believe that it took the Soviet leaders a whole year to begin to understand the first things about atomic energy and the elementary requirement for its effective control.”” W hat had happened? The end had come for the political effort, inspired by the atom ic scientists, initiated by the United States, to bring about the interna­ tional control o f atom ic energy. The opportunity to establish lim ited w orld government by peaceful means, im plicit in the proposal to abolish the sovereign veto in cases o f enforcem ent o f decisions erf the atomic control agency, was lo st The C old W ar would follow very soon. W ithin years all nations would be em­ barked on programs o f national defense, having learned, as Romulo said, that the United N ations could not be trusted to provide peace and security. The peoples o f the world have been living in the afterm ath o f the failure o f the Baruch plan ever since.

Americans Overextended W as six m onths or one year too long to w ait to accom plish w hat Baruch him self called “some diminution o f absolute national sovereignty”? W hy, then, the rush? Because delays were thought to give the Russians, otherw ise so in­ transigent over Eastern Europe, the Dardanelles, Iran, and China, opportunity to develop atomic weapons for themselves. On a rereading of the record, the Amer­ ican plan does seem to have been, both in the minds o f its proponents and in truth, “generous and just.” In the history o f modem nations, the offer to sur­ render control o f the greatest o f weapons to a common sovereign was unparal­ leled. Baruch sensed this, going beyond the State Department to advocate aboli­ tion o f the veto, but he could bear to risk the security of the United States only for so long, without signs o f greater appreciation o f the positive elem ents o f his courageous proposal from the Soviet Union.

Russians Slow W hat about the Russians? The Russians, for their part, were slow to be im ­ pressed with the problem o f atomic energy. They began, much as the Lilienthal board had six months before, with the idea that not even international inspection MBaruch to Truman, 4 January 1947; Truman to Baruch, 12 January 1947, quoted in Policy at the Crossroads, 56; Baruch, The Public Years, 374; "The Soviet Amend­ ments and Mr. Gromyko’s Speech,” Bulletin o f the Atom ic Scientists, March 1947, pp. 69, 100; Andrei A. Gromyko, “Soviet Proposals for Atomic Energy Control,” ibid., August 1947, pp. 219-20; Eugene Rabinowitch, “The Soviet Plan for Atomic Energy Control,” ibid., August 1947, p. 201. Baruch’s place was taken by the regular U.S. delegate to the U.N., Warren Austin. There were two more major reports to the Security Council, neither unanimously agreed to. On 17 May 1948, die U N . AEC re­ ported that it had reached an impasse in its work beyond its competence to overcome. In September 1949, the Russians tested their first atomic bomb.



world federation

was necessary but that another Geneva convention could "outlaw " such a m ass weapon. Their scientists, however, within three months o f the June opening o f negotiations, saw the scientific and technical problem exactly as the Americans did. Their political representatives, in an atmosphere of ultimatum, slowly saw the need for inspection by December and later for management and research to solve the problem o f control. B ut there was an elem ent of truth in M olotov's charge that the American plan was characterized by a certain degree of “selfishness.” It was natural for the Russians to be suspicious o f the stages for the transfer of U.S. atomic secrets, m aterials, plants, and weapons to the international control agency and for the agency’s “strategic” redevelopment, which stages, indeed, were never spelled o u t W hat they thought o f the Bikini tests immediately afta* the introduction o f the Baruch plan and o f the Americans’ refusal to enter into a convention to stop ad­ ding to, and to destroy, the atomic bomb stockpile—leaving the critical m ateri­ als and plants quite untouched—may be im agined by the reader. Lastly, the Russians had no use a t all for the notion o f abolishing the Security Council veto, as if it would be possible to enforce a plan like the Americans’ by a kind o f U.N. war.

World Government N*c*ssory In fact, the Baruch plan was so seriously flawed that only m ajor m odifica­ tions—never forthcoming—would have made it workable. It is, perhaps, natural for an American reading the record to suppose that Russians would be the viola­ tors, but the language of the plan was universal. Imagine the effect if the United States should ever have been adjudged a violator. W ould it be right to apply sanctions, ultim ately including war, on the whole American people in order to “enforce” the control agency’s decisions? Never, after one obscure reference in Baruch’s first speech, was there any argument in the U.N. AEC for establishing a rule o f law reaching to individuals. N ever was there argument, as G renville Clark suggested, for taking dissatisfac­ tion with the veto as an opportunity for fundam entally revising the C h arta, making the Assembly a world legislature under a system o f weighted representa­ tion, the Council an executive branch, and the Court a judiciary. It was world federal governm ent like this that was necessary, in our historical judgm ent, to make the international control of atomic energy a reality.

12 Formation of United World Federalists Rep. Jacob Javits: '1 will say that I consider World Federal­ ists the men and women of the future.” Chairman Charles Eaton: “How about the present?” Rep. Javits: *1 think we are of the present, Mr. Chairman." —House hearings on revision of the U.N. Charter, 11 May 1948

D Toward Ashevile D y Novem ber 1946, the m ovem ent for w orld federal governm ent in the United States was rising to the climax o f its organizers' hopes—the union o f all m ass mem bership federalist groups. (Nonmembership groups were kept o u t) This union, United W orld Federalists, would be effectively accomplished a t the Asheville (North Carolina) congress o f 21-23 February 1947. Historically, it is puzzling why the federalists took so long. Their principal m otivation was to m eet the threat o f the atomic bomb, one and a half years before. In the interim , the United N ations Organization began to meet, the United States proposed the international control of atomic energy, and the Allies at Paris sat down to nego­ tiate a peace treaty with Germany and her Axis partners in Europe. M ost world federalists, like their fellow citizens, seem to have trusted their governments, which had brought them to victory in the war. “Roosevelt would take care o f the peace,” M illie Blake had said of federalist expectations. But Roosevelt was no more; Harry Truman was in the W hite House. His cabinet, except for Henry W allace, was made up of advisors schooled in the war. The U.N. proved no match for W estern-Soviet controversy over the treatm ent o f Poland, the Baruch plan was headed for failure, and the peace conference was m arred by insults and accusations o f H itlerite am bitions. (A peace treaty with Germany was never negotiated, though years later in 1975 the Helsinki Accords served an equivalent function.) It was in response to the breakup of friendly rela­ tions in 1946 that the federalists turned seriously to union. The trouble was that there were different conceptions of the desired form o f a government of the world (universal or democratic, minimal or maximal) and particularly o f the means o f attainm ent (U.N. reform or peoples’ convention). M oney was at stake, and so



were reputations. High principles bad to be defended. W hy unite? Because to do so was a demonstration o f the principle o f federa­ tion, because it was an application o f the people's power in democracy. Tom G riessem er o f W orld Federalists looked forward to "one strong, consolidated movement” that would have roots “across the country" rather than in one nation­ al headquarters. B roadcaster Raymond Gram Swing foresaw an evangelical m ovement that would sweep the country with a “fire o f fervor“ provided by 50 m illion adherents. Corporation lawyer Thomas Finletter o f Americans United aim ed to establish a “new corporation” in which would be vested “all o f the property, personnel and interests of the constituent groups,” a united citizens’ or­ ganization to lobby and influence the government. Jack W hitehouse wanted the strongest possible grassroots organization to stop the drift toward a third world war.1 It was reflective o f the caution and principled divisions o f the movement that the initiative to unite it should have come from im passioned youth in Students for Federal W orld Government

A Divided and Dbpfettud Movement G renville C lark thought the strategy o f pressing for U N . C harter amend­ ments was still the right one. Time would make it apparent that atom ic control made amending the Charter a “necessity.” W ithin the year he would, in fact, lead another effort in the General Assembly, through the Argentines, to introduce the necessary amendments. But he was convinced the movement could not expect “strong leadership for world government” from U.S. officials. General M arshall, who was replacing Byrnes as secretary o f state, probably could not “grasp the concept” He wrote to his Dublin follow -up group: I am impressed with how slowly the thing develops. For example, they just now seem to be getting down to a real discussion of what “weapons adaptable to mass destruction” (other than the atomic bomb) consist of. That is some­ thing that we were all debating and forming pretty clear ideas about nearly a year ago. The moral is, I think, that the advocates of world government ought to be prepared to go through with their efforts over quite a long period and not strike so fast a pace that they get tired and can’t put on a spurt at the critical moment.

Through 1947, Clark was surprisingly silen t Not that he had given up. He was filling notebooks with observations of the perplexing course of American foreign policy. This business o f moving the governm ent through citizens' initiatives, tow ard a policy of world government was much harder than m oving it2* 1 Griessemer to Friend, “Extra!” n.d., ante 21 February 1947, his emphases; UWF Papers, 57.Asheville Convention Reports; Swing to von W indegger, 6 February 1947, Schwimmer-Lloyd Collection, T6S, my emphases; Finletter to Griessemer, 17 December 1946, UWF Papers, 42.Asheville; “World Government Peace Conference," Planet, 28 August 1946, Regenstein Library, World Republic Papers, Envelope Vol. 2, No. 4.

Förmrtftûn ofI Unltod IM IIM M I V W B I W World V I I V IF#dofoKsts


toward a policy o f traditional defense, as in his old Plattsburg and Selective Ser­ vice A ct days.1 W orld Federalists, U.S.A., were “bee-busy” with M illie Blake’s advertising campaign, claim ing that its effects were “impressive” in the U.N. fight against the veto. Evidence was also cited o f the advertising's political im pact in a con­ gressional candidate’s view with alarm o f W orld Federalists' “communist** ten­ dencies; a sim ilar effect was seen in M oscow’s Izvestia, which saw a “capitalist plot.”1 Americans United for W orld Government w ere recovering from their disap­ pointm ent at not getting form er secretary o f state Stettinius—chief defender o f the “adequacy” of the U.N.—to speak at their big dinner for the élite of American internationalists. The organization’s pretensions were being punctured at many points by W orld Federalists, whose interest in m erger was ju st about sp en t Americans United were concealing their financial situation; their mem bership claim s w ere down to 10,000; they adm itted they never had an explicitly stated policy; their suggestions for a join t board were such as to give them dom inant control, even though it was apparent that m ost of their strength was in New York City while W orld Federalists were nation-w ide. Talks o f m erger were sus­ pended in an atmosphere of maneuver and m istrust45 Student Federalists had ju st put out a new number o f their paper after a threemonth lapse in the summer. A series o f “monthly forums on questions o f cur­ rent interest” were planned. S t John’s graduate Charles N elson’s list o f books on world government was recommended for self-education.1 3* The M assachusetts Committee for W orld Federation was marshaling its re­ sources after its referendum success to introduce an action resolution in the State House on Beacon Hill.* The Oak Ridge W orld Government Committee, at a moment when the ato­ m ic scientists’ movement seemed to be in a state o f arrested disintegration due to public apathy, official slurs, member resignations, and U.N. AEC tension, was asking w hat issue could “whip up enthusiasm” like that o f a year before. Cuthbert Daniel for the committee proclaimed his w ell-know n belief that w orld gov­ ernm ent was the response o f an order sufficient to m eet the challenge o f atom ic war. He was opposed by W. Arnold for the m ajority in the Association of Oak 1 Cranston to Douglas Arant et al., 24 January 1947; Grenville Clark, Memoran­ dum, 17 February 1947, Baker Library, Clark Papers, 15.3. * "The Pay Off,” World Government News, November 1946, p. 2. 4 Blake to Leo Cherne. 28 October 1946, Lilly Library, UWF Papers, 42.Cleveland Convention [sic]. Ulric Bell had recently left Americans United. His place was taken effectively by Thomas K. Finletter, who brought a somewhat more realistic spirit to merger negotiations. 5 Student Federalist Headquarters Bulletin, 25 September 1946; Chapter Bulletin, 1 October 1946, UWF Papers, 57.Asheville Convention Reports. * Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Senate, Resolutions Providing for Request for Amendments to the Charter of the United Nations Resulting in a Limited World Feder­ al Government, S204, 14 January 1947.



Ridge Engineers and Scientists: “Our members are out to save [the] world. Piffle and Epworth League! W e should be more concerned about secrecy in sci­ ence, and [the] Army and Navy talcing over science.”7 The one new ray o f light from the atomic scientists’ movement—and one o f the last o f their original spirit—was Norbert W iener’s open letter refusing to co­ operate w ith the m ilitary rocket program o f December 1946. W iener was the distinguished M assachusetts Institute of Technology professor o f mathem atics who had founded the branch of science he called “cybernetics,” dealing with feed­ back control system s; it found some application during the w ar in antiaircraft systems and later in automation, economics, and psychology. He replied to an unnamed research scientist working on the new ballistic m issiles who had asked for a paper o f his written for Vannevar Bush’s National Defense Research Com­ mittee. W iener refused on moral grounds:* In the past, the comity of scholars has made it a custom to furnish scien­ tific information to any person seriously seeking it. However, we must face these facts: The policy of the government itself during and after the war, say in the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, has made it clear that to provide scientific information is not a necessarily innocent act, and may entail the gravest consequences.... The practical use of guided missiles can only be to kill foreign civilians indiscriminately, and it furnishes no protection whatsoever to civilians in this country. I cannot conceive a situation in which such weapons can pro­ duce any effect other than extending the kamikaze way of fighting to whole nations. Their possession can do nothing but endanger us by encouraging the tragic insolence of the military mind.

W iener’s moving letter was in effect a call for scientists to strike the national defense program. But with the failure o f the effort to establish the international control o f atom ic weapons and other weapons o f mass destruction—that is, to establish a lim ited world government, which W iener apparently never advocated — w hat choice was there for scientists who still wished to defend the United States? W iener’s was, in Einstein’s phrase, “unsound pacifism .” The University of Chicago’s Committee to R am e a W orld Constitution, un­ der Robert M. Hutchins, had formed soon a fta Hiroshima but conducted its de­ liberations in secret, virtually unknown to the larger movement. Participants reached working consensus on their model world legislature, grant of powers, and executive during the sum m a, th a ï recessed for three months a f ta its 10th meet­ ing on 24 October 1946. Time was needed, said secretary G. A. Börgese blithely, for “softening up” remaining issues and waiting for opportunities presented by the “deterioration o f other hopes” in the U.N. George Peck, assistant professor o f history on leave from Lehigh University, had ju st been hired as editor of a projected “heavy” journal of the committee. The first issue was planned for 1 AORES Log, 30 October 1946, p. 89, Regenstein Library, AORES Papers, 8.1. ' Norbert Wiener, “A Scientist Rebels,” Atlantic, December 1946, p. 46; reprinted in Bulletin o f the Atomic Scientists, January 1947, p. 31.

Formation of United World Foderaİsri


January 1947.* True to academic pattern, the new journal, Common Cause, did not appear until July 1947. Precious tim e was being lost. The Campaign for W orld Government was licking its wounds after an unfor­ tunate split in 1945, after Lola M averick Lloyd’s death and certain disagreements between the younger Lloyds and the aging Rosika Schwimmer. The group di­ vided into the Campaign for W orld Government, based in Chicago, and the Inter­ national Campaign for W orld Government, based in New York. Georgia Lloyd became effective leader of the former, Edith W ynner, o f the latter.* 101 The Cam­ paign was not a membership organization, but splits in movements to unite the world were a bad sign. Lastly, in November 1946, the deceptive Ely Culbertson was winning new tricks. During the summer and fall a quite spontaneous citizens’ endorsement o f his Q uota Force plan developed in M iddletown, Ohio, which was all the more remarkable in that it was led by W orld W ar II veterans in the American Legion. They were alarmed by the drift toward war, the return o f power politics, the pros­ pects o f an armament race, and the talk of preventive war. The alternative, they saw, was to strengthen the United Nations. Culbertson’s plan seemed to the ve­ terans most “concrete and workable” (there was hardly another in 1946 o f sim ilar published scope). It required the United States to give up only the “sovereign right” to wage war, and it would abolish the veto, strengthen the W orld Court, and establish an “international police [military] force.”“ C ritics pointed out, however, that the “three reform s” o f the plan provided only for the same old abolition o f the veto in a Security Council representative o f sovereign states, the Baruch plan with artificial quota strictures, and an inter­ national police force to enforce U.N. decisions by war. An ultimatum was even provided to Russia: jo in w ithin three months or the rest o f the nations w ill unite under the plan without you. The deceptiveness of this revived Culbertson plan was a serious obstacle to the movement. His group, the C itizens Commit­ tee for United Nations Reform (CCUNR), became strong enough to support na­ tional legislation, but its popular following seems never to have been as influ­ ential as the force of Culbertson’s personality. The American Legion officially adopted the Q uota Force plan as its foreign policy recommendation on 23 No­ vember 1946, before Asheville.12

European Foderalsts Abroad, in October 1946, the first meeting o f what would become the W orld M ovement for W orld Federal Government and the European Union of Federalists ’“Brief History of the Committee,” Common Cause, 1 (July 1947): 18-19; “Con­ stitution Drafting,” World Government News, December 1946, pp. 2-3. 10 International Campaign for World Government, 19 July 1947, New York Public Library, Schwimmer-Lloyd Collection; Georgia Lloyd, Interview, 30 May 1981. 11 “Crossroads Middletown,” n.d., post 2 September 1946, pp. 2, 3, 5, 10, 12, 14, 15, UWF Papers, 9.CCUNR. u Culbertson to Friend, 9 December 1946; CCUNR, “Our Purpose and Program,” n.d., c. December 1946, UWF Papers, 9.CCUNR.



was held in Luxembourg. So great a m atter as the unification o f Europe and o f the world could not be left to the Americans. Britain’s Federal Union, in which Henry U sbarne was more and more being named as a rising star, issued the invi­ tation to the conference. W orld Federalists, U.S.A., had set the goals o f both a national m erger and an international conference as far back as their Cleveland convention in A pril 1946, but the English group w as first to take the initiative internationally.11 Seventy-five representatives from 37 organizations in 14 countries assem ­ bled. There was vigorous debate a t Luxembourg about tbe priorities o f European versus w orld federation—England’s Frances L. Josephy and Holland’s H. R. Nord viewed the fonner as all that was then practical; the United Stales’ Edward Clark and Tom Griessemer regarded the latter as alone able to prévoit war among states or regions. The upshot, under the guidance o f international law yer M ax Habicht, was the creation o f two organizations: the Movement for W orld Feder­ al Governm ent and the European Union o f Federalists. It began a split that would last until the 1980s. Permanent headquarters was to be on the European continent; tem porary, at W orld Government House in New York. G riessem er was to be temporary secretary. The conference to formally organize the two or­ ganizations would be held in M ontreux in Switzerland the next summer.* 14 In November, Henry Usbom e was still trying to raise the money in sterling am id the many financial restrictions o f postwar England to bring Edith W ynner over as peoples’ convention advisor. During the year, she had been working mostly with Nashville attorney Fyke Farm er on a “popular initiative’’ for world government. Financing—always one o f the greatest problems o f popular ap­ proaches—was then being considered by M issouri banker F. R. von W indegger and m echanical cotton p ic k » inventor John D. R u st W hen Usborne’s radical pam phlet I f They W on’t, We Will! came her way, she immediately wrote her as­ sociates of his “parallel efforts.” Usbome in turn was quick to credit h » “per­ sistent influence” for the idea o f world government established by a direct appeal to the sovereignty o f the people.15 A t the end o f 1946, Usbom e was asked by the Labour Party to move the ac­ ceptance o f the king’s annual speech from the throne, a traditional occasion for the governing party to state its future policy. Apparently with Labour party ap­ proval, Usbome used the occasion to make his second speech to Parliam ent on world government. The trial balloon was deflated, and British policy soon turned M“Luxembourg Declaration,” 16 October 1946, World Republic Papers, WMWFG, 1946. 14 Proceedings, Luxembourg Conference, pp. 9-16; Report by Tom Griessemer of the International Conference of Federalists in Luxembourg, 14-16 October 1946, UWF Papers, 42.Luxembourg Conference. Foster Parmelee of Student Federalists came to the conference from a trip behind the “Iron Curtain.” He reported there “great enthusiasm for federation.” ” Wynner to Usbome, 29 September 194S, Schwimmer-Lloyd Collection, T60; Wynner to Fanner, von Windegger, Gerber, and Rust, 12 October 1946; Usbome to Wynner, 12 October 1946, AORES Papers, 9.3.

BinwtfdlftAfli Ifc ja ij W nAf h ih w Jth


to support for an Atlantic alliance with the United States.1'

Prospers for a Moss, Popular, Grassroots Movement In contrast to this disarray was the enthusiasm o f Students for Federal W orld Government in Chicago. The youth group toyed briefly with the idea o f a “stu­ dent m ardi on W ashington" to support the Baruch plan, but that was beyond their financial resources then being developed. Instead, their student teams on the road distributed 10,000 copies o f Baruch’s speech, which the State Depart­ m ent gave them. Several SFFWG members wrote letters to correspondents in Poland and Eastern Europe. In response to a Saturday Evening Post article of 13 July, “Your Flesh Should Creep” (on lack of defense against atom ic and other new weapons o f modern war), D avid McCoy o f the “off-cam pus unrecognized student organization” got him self received before the Northwestern international relations club. McCoy spoke on the political defense—world government—“An Antidote to Gooseflesh.”17

Ronald Reagan Gives $ 2 0 0 Talk like this raised money for the radical student group. In early July 1946, Paul Sauer went to Los Angeles to start up another garage operation at 4967 % North Figueroa S treet One contributor he found, who gave $200, was the film star Ronald Reagan. Hardly had Sauer started ringing doorbells, however, when Jack W hitehouse called for him to come to New York. A meeting w ith M rs. John Alden Carpenter of Beverly, M assachusetts, who had given them $1,000 for an essay contest, and other potential big contributors had been arranged, in­ cluding Orson W elles. Sauer instantly flew to New York. “H istory w ill be in your hands W ednesday night,” McCoy wrote them both. It is not clear from the records ju st w hat history was made there, but apparently Sauer got a lead to Charles Henry Davis, prominent civil engineer (designer o f the first railroad tun­ nel under the Hudson River), Quaker, pacifist, and friend of youth. It is said that Sauer walked from Boston to Cape Cod to m eet D avis, who was so taken that he advised the boys until after Asheville (February 1947). He gave them $5,000, which paid for many o f their trips, and seems to have lent them another $5,000. It was Davis who secured the large building in downtown Evanston into which SFFWG moved before Asheville, changing their name to2 1* “ Great Britain, Parliament, House of Commons, 12 November 1946, H ansard’s Parliamentary Debates, cols. 9-12, 25-28. The Associated Press excerpted Usborae’s speech at length. The fullest accounts came in the New York Herald Tribune the day after. No notice in the New York Times nor in the “liberal” PM. Wynner to Usbome, 12 and 13 November 1946, Schwimmer-LJoyd Collection, T60. “ Sauer to McCoy, 6 July 1946; Francis H. Russell, Chief, Division of Public Li­ aison, to Whitehouse, 28 August 1946; Press Release on Warsaw Exhibit, n.d., c. 7 July 1946; John Huebner to Jire Kalaja and Wojciech Goralczyk, 1 August 1946; Kalaja to SFFWG, 10 December 1946; Press Release to D aily Northwestern, 19 July 1946, World Republic Papers, SFFWG, July-August 1946; David McCoy, “An Anti­ dote to Gooseflesh,” Planet, 24 July 1946, p. 2.



W orld Republic. The W orld Republic headquarters, for the six months the boys could afford to pay the rent, was in its time the largest building in the world ded­ icated to world governm ent" A t the end o f July 1946, Paul Hoffman, president o f Studebaker Coip. and future adm inistrator o f the European Cooperation A dm inistration (M arshall plan), and his wife Edith gave SFFWG a new Studebaker Champion for one o f their 14 team s. The boys explained to the Hoffmans that Clarence Streit’s move­ m en t by contrast would promote “gigantic power blocks, ergo war.” Another group, die W orld C itizens o f Oberlin, was too "dusty and tim idly academ ic.” “W e are deeply im pressed,” the Hoffmans wrote, “by the sacrifices you have made, which shows us your great sincerity and integrity.”"

World Rnpublc on Breakup of Port» PuocaConfurenca By early A ugust W hitehouse appointed him self temporary chairman o f a co­ ordinating com m ittee to bring about a national conference to unite all w orld government groups on Thanksgiving Day in November. “This action,” he wrote the invitees, “is long overdue. There often appears to be a duplication o f efforts and a waste o f time, energy and finances because o f the lack of correlated activi­ ties o f all groups concerned.” This was the initiative that would lead to the for­ m ation of United W orld Federalists.“ W hitehouse was alarmed by the breakup o f the Paris peace conference, held to draft the peace treaties with Italy and the Balkan countries preparatory to the peace treaty with Germany, in early August 1946. M olotov and Byrnes ex­ changed accusations: the former that the United States was building a W estern “bloc” against the Soviet Union, the latter that the Soviet Union was directing its “satellites” to oppose the United States. In the debate over Italy, the United States and G reat Britain were charged with seeking alliances with “Fascists,” at­ tempting to “enslave” Italy through “foreign trusts and cartels.” In turn the So­ viet Union was accused o f claiming that ex-enemy states were more democratic than Italy because “they have harm onized their views with the Soviet Union.” Serious differences arose over Trieste, reparations obligations, and control o f the Danube. The conference alm ost broke up when an American transport plane strayed over Yugoslav territory and was shot down on 9 August, followed by a second on the 19th, with the loss of five American lives. A satisfactory apology cam e only after Byrnes threatened to call upon the Security Council to take “appropriate action.” Although the conference lingered on until October 15, it MContributions of $10.00 or More, March ’46 to September ’47, World Republic Papers, Minutes, 1946; McCoy to Sauer and Whitehouse, 8 July 1946, ibid., SFFWG, July-August 1946; Davis to Harold Bock, 31 July 1946; Davis to Whitehouse, 12 De­ cember 1946; Davis to Whitehouse, 15 January 1947, ibid., Davis. " Hoffman to Whitehouse, 22 July 1946; L. S. Morrin, Assistant Regional Man­ ager for Studebaker, to Sauer, 30 July 1946. “ Minutes, 3 August, 1946, ibid.. Minutes, 1946; “World Government Peace Con­ ference,” Planet, 28 August 1946, ibid.. Envelope Vol. 2, No. 4.

fo rm ten of United World fodorafats


was clear in August that there would be no peace treaties.*1

Whitehouso's Speech against o Now War W hitehouse’s reaction was extreme. He went to speak before rival Student Federalists, who happened to be bolding their annual convention in Chicago dur­ ing the first week o f September. His raw, angry speech revealed a slow, deep popular w ill in opposition to another war.** We have been betrayed! We have been betrayed! Some of us are the ve­ terans of this war, and others are the veterans of heartache.... The first great betrayal ... is in fact that you and I went all around the work! and slaughtered Japs and Germans because our Government said we were fighting on the cross of nationalism ... for the rights of democracies.... To­ day there is more chaos and destruction in the world. Today you and I have come back and we are not sitting at the peace tables. The old men are there [and took from us our victory and remade it in the likeness of the former world they knew].... That is the second and greatest betrayal. They have left us with $275 bil­ lions in debt, and expect us to pay it off. And yet they go on spending $12 billion a year for armaments. That should tell you that we are heading for war. A third great betrayal is the United Nations.... These are not the things that you went to war for. If the United Nations had the law and the power they could step into China and stop [the civil war]. The fourth great betrayal is our present G overnm ent... They are building atomic bombs, they have their Navy set in places all over the world. We m aintain a heavy patrol in the skies over Yugoslavia until shot down as a protest by the Yugoslav Government. What is the Navy doing all around the world? What are we doing building 500 atomic bombs a year? What are we doing drafting 185,000 men in peace time?

Em bedded in this speech was W hitehouse’s solution: “If you w ant world gov­ ernment, give up school, and live on your savings, and devote twenty-four hours a d a y to getting world governm ent.... Peace is attainable. You can’t wage it like w ar....’’

Ih» Issu» of Margur The Thanksgiving Day conference, after rather heroic efforts, did take place, and a planning committee, entitled the U.S. Council o f the M ovement for W orld Federal Government (by reference to the recent Luxembourg conference), was formed for die legal merger. The committee, usually consisting o f Stewart Ogil-1* ” James F. Byrnes, Speaking Frankly (New York: Harper & Bros., 1947), 14049. 11 [Sauer?] to Nelson, 9 September 1946, ibid., SFFWG, September-October 1946; Jack Whitehouse, Speech before Student Federalist Convention, n.d., c. 5 Sep­ tember 1946, UWF Papers, 57.Chicago Convention Reports. This is the only speech by the founder of SFFWG to come down in the records.



vy for W orld Federalists, Thomas Finletter for Americans United, H elm Ball for Student Federalists, Thomas M ahony for the M assachusetts Committee, and Phillips Ruopp for Students for Federal W orld Government, began meeting at W orld Government House in New York to lay the groundwork for the unifica­ tion “congress.” They decided to hold the congress in the popular Blue Ridge mountain resort town o f Asheville, North Carolina. W orld Federalists had active chapters in the state under the general leadership o f attorney R. M ayne Albright of Raleigh. Americans United also had a strong chapter at the U niversity o f North Carolina at Chapel H ill, led by President Frank P. Graham and Dean o f the Law School Henry Brandis. The idea of world government was thought to be “politically accepted” in the state (it was the first to pass Humber’s resolution), so hopes were high for a “good showing." The committee also quickly decided to invite to merge only “real membership organi­ zations” whose aim was to establish world government through “propaganda, ed­ ucation, and political action.”

Rnfeftw's Design for UWF M erger was a serious step. It was not setting up a mere coordinating council but rather the “establishment of a New Corporation in which would be vested all o f the property, personnel and interests of the constituent groups, the latter to disappear from the scene,” as Thomas Finletter proposed. Voting on merger was to be proportional to proven membership. The intent was to create what we would call a political lobby. Finletter designed it on the model o f a public cor­ poration. A board o f directors o f 30 would be elected, who would have the pow­ er to co-opt an additional 20 and appoint an executive committee of 12. Policy, other than the general one to “engage in activities looking to a federal world government,” would be decided by an annual convention of the membership and in the interim by the executive committee. Dues were to be $3 per year, o f which $1 was to go for a subscription to World Government News, $1 to the lo­ cal chapter, 500 to the state branch, and 500 to the national corporation.0 In addition to m erger sessions, there were to be parallel “general” sessions at which nonmembership organizations could be brought into “the same coopera­ tive spirit and closer affiliation.” These latter organizations, in a list o f invitees that exhausted the field of the world government movement at the beginning o f 1947, included: Action Committee for a World Constitutional Convention (Philip Isely), American Lawyers Committee for World Government (Fyke Farmer), Campaign for World Government (Georgia Lloyd), MMinutes of ... Committee ... Making Plans for a Joint Convention of All World Federalist Groups .... 7 December 1946, UWF Papers, 57.Asheville; Finletter to Griessemer, 17 December 1946, ibid., 42.Asheville; Minutes of Meeting of Move­ ment for World Federal Government, U.S. Council, 4-5 January 1947; Convention Announcement, 10 January 1947; Minutes of Meeting Preliminary to Asheville Con­ vention, 1 February 1947, ibid., 57.Asheville.

Rxmctilon of IMfad World f f ^ l w Fedaraisfs r M I I M M B w l W IIW V


Committee to Frame a World Constitution (G. A. Borgese), Citizens Committee for United Nations Reform (Ely Culbertson), Federal Union (ClarenceStreit), Institute for World Government (George C. Holt of Rollins College), International Campaign for Work) Government (EdithWynner), Missouri State Committee for World Government (Fritz von Windegger), World Citizenship Movement (Col. M. Thomas Tchou), and the World Government Committee of the Association of Oak Ridge Engine«« and Scientists (NortonGerber).

PositionStciMTwnrs bnfore Ashnvtl* * 50,000,000 World Fndnralsts M ajor position statements preceded the congress. The great issue was peo­ ples’ convention versus U.N. reform . Generally, the old«:, adult, and more es­ tablished groups preferred to work through the United Nations, while the young­ er, student, and more independent groups urged radical action. Grenville Clark, who was not planning to go to Asheville, was frankly doubtful that amalgama­ tion would be possible without "diluting” the new organization’s platform to get everyone in. He preferred m ere affiliation so that at least some organizations could take vigorous action without internal conflicts. Effective m erger would be a “miracle.”1* W orld Federalists—Tom Griessem er especially—tried to resolve the issue over m ethods by bringing as democratically representative a voting delegation from all over the country as possible. He hoped that the desire to create "one strong, consolidated m ovem ent" for world governm ent in the U nited States w ould overcom e all differences, especially if it were drawn from across the country—not just from New York or Chicago.” Raymond Swing o f Americans United warned the planners against distraction by the “ideological problem” from the “evangelical.” They should develop a general will, afire o f fervor, for world federation, drawing as many as 50 m illion people to the cause, leaving constitutional details to the governments. This was to be a “great grassroots movement,” Swing argued, analogous to the one that made die Republican Party accept a United Nations policy at its M ackinac Island (M ichigan) conference in late 1943:” Once again the politicians must be made to realize that the people insist on peace. But this time they must know it can only be achieved through the in­ troduction of law in the present vacuum of anarchy in world relations.

Student Federalists (SF), always pressing their elders, were divided over poli­ cy. It had taken m ost of the year to organize now over 100 chapters, and the * Grenville Clark, Memorandum, 17 February 1947, Clark Papers, 15.3. u Griessemer to Friend, “Extra!” n.d., ante 21 February 1947, his emphases; Griessemer to Accreditations Committee, 12 February 1947, UWF Papers, 57.Asheville Convention Reports. * Swing to von Windegger, 6 February 1947, Schwimmer-Lloyd Collection, T65, my emphases.



problem facing their leaders was. W hatever were the members going to do? The educational program was hard to sustain after the summer institutes. A political program had yet to be undertaken. Even “adults" privately urged SF to become political. The pollster Elmo R op» recommended die students abolish their adult advisory board lest they “add to [their] own mistakes those o f an older generation who had already made many.” The students should “go it alone.”” Founder Harris W offord wanted Student Federalists to get into the politics of the 1948 elections, propagating world federation as a great national issue, sup­ porting the nom ination o f federalists for office and the inclusion of federalist planks in the party platform s, then campaigning and “taking stands.” College representative Tom Hughes objected that if SF becam e “m ilitant,” the high schools would drop their chapters “like hot potatoes." John Logue thought a middle position was to agitate for world government as a single issue that could unite swing blocs o f voters in both parties, as in the women’s suffrage move­ m ent in 1920 or in the Negro desegregation movement that won bipartisan Fair Employment Practices Commission planks in 1944. Chapter secretary Virginia Lastayo and public inform ation director Eleanor Schneider disagreed about whether to portray the U.N. as “no good.” Helen Ball, national chairman [sic], surveyed these views and urged adherence to the “majority” in the new merged organization in order to present a “united front to the public.” The high school chapters would have to be sacrificed or be­ come mere clubs. The college chapters, having many veterans, were determined to become political. The balance of wisdom on the U.N. seemed to be that Stu­ dent Federalists should not seem to advocate its destruction, while agitating for world federal governm ent A large delegation (half the size of that o f W orld Fed­ eralists’) was being elected by the chapters. M ost o f the board was going.”

The "Peace Palace” at 807 Davis Street On the eve o f Asheville, in February 1947, Students for Federal W orld Gov­ ernm ent were moving into what the Chicago Sun called a “Peace Palace” at 807 D avis Street in the heart o f the Evanston business d istric t The three-story building with showroom windows on the sidewalk level had space for receptions and sm all assemblies, a score of private offices, a library, printing shop, radio studio, darkroom, and, on the top floor, a dormitory for 30 men, employed full­ time at “no salaries.” (Volunteer women were to cook in a basement kitchen.) There was a little fleet o f two jeeps, eight cars, a motor scooter, and 16 bicycles. Numbers o f available volunteer workers “coast-to-coast" had climbed, it was* * Ball to Board Members, 10 December 1946, UWF Papers, 57.Asheville Con­ vention Reports. ” Minutes, SF Board Meeting, 17-18 November 1946, UWF Papers, 57 .Student Council; John Logue, ‘Target—1948,” Student Federalist, November 1946, p. 2, Riorden Papers; Virginia Lastayo, “If This Be Treason... ,” Student Federalists, December-January 1947, p. 2, ibid.; Schneider to Ball, 6 February 1947, UWF Papers, 57.Student Council; Ball to Delegates and Board, Memorandum on Asheville Con­ vention, n.d., c. 15 February 1947, ibid., 57.Asheville.

Foımafionof UnitedWoridFudaralsts


claimed, to 7,000.” “W e’re going to put peace on every main street in the world,” said W hitehouse to the press, “and w e're starting right here in Evanston." Announcement was soon made of a name change to W orld Republic. “It is more descriptive and easier to understand,” said McCoy; “our aim is an international republic.” An 18-m onth budget of $2 million was also announced. Plans were to have SO m oi on the road by summer, promoting the peoples’ convention and soliciting funds. Businessmen were usually incredulous. “They can’t believe we really operate the way we do," observed W hitehouse, “on a shoestring and a prayer." An oil com­ pany executive was heard repeating to himself, “It's a regular children's crusade." A veteran reporter o f many crusades was frightened: “They’re too young to be afraid. They ju st d o n 't know." He continued, “They’re so sure they can pull it off that—well, somehow, they almost make you believe it." A colum nist won­ dered if someday the old garage m ight be as famous as Constitution Hall in Phil­ adelphia.30

World ftapubk’sPositionbefore Ashuvile The position paper for W orld Republic on the eve o f Asheville was written by Phillips Ruopp, ju st released by the U.S. Army. Ruopp began with the goal o f federal world government as the “minimal framework” for a “dynamic peace," then passed directly to the impending split over means. His whole paper was an argument that the two means of governm ent-initiated U.N. reform and the peo­ ples’ convention were not contradictory but complementary. It was only too likely that both means would fail and die world would be united by atomic con­ quest and tyranny, Ruopp argued. The older movement had been working few years for governmental action and become fairly well recognized; but the newer one aiming a t a direct appeal to the people had recently gained in popularity. W hat was needed was “a program which keeps world government squarely in the public eye. This means world government is an issue in the 1948 elections," Ruopp argued. A direct appeal to the people was consistait with American Rev­ olutionary traditions. “W e are working against time. ”31 Ruopp was immediately answered by Vernon Nash of W orld Federalists. Nash came straight to the threat of revolution: “In my judgm ent, no enemy o f the effort for world government could possibly do us as much harm as spokes­ men on our side urging a kind of direct action which would try to bypass gov-* * Whitehouse to Byron, 13 December 1946, World Republic Papers, SFFWG, November-December 1946: “The Federalist Manual: How to Organize a World Govern­ ment Movement... ,” [2 September] 1946, Regenstein Library, Committee to Frame a W orld Constitution Papers, 24.2. “Federalists Plan to Unify,” Christian Science Monitor, 5 December 1946. “ “How 7 War Vets Fired a Shot for Peace Now Heard around the World," Chicago Sun, 23 February 1947; “SFFWG Gets New Name: Becomes ‘World Republic,”’ Daily Northwestern, 20 February 1947. ” Phillips Ruopp, An Open Letter to My Friends Who Are Working for a Warless World and a Positive Peace, 10 January 1947, UWF Papers, 57.Asheville.



emments.” His shrinking {mm the p e lle s ’ convention was not ju st fear, said Nash. It m ight be possible to bypass governments to draft a world constitution, but to ratify the constitution and put it into effect, activists would run into “exactly the same handicap" that made them turn from governments in the first place.” There is thus no escaping the necessity of persuading our governments to act, unless one is prepared to espouse revolutionary tactics at some stage in the process. Since we must win ova* our political leaders (or change them) sooner or later, why not stay on the ball from the beginning?

Two Attitudes toward the People The controversy between the advocates o f a peoples’ convention or U.N. re­ form went to the depths o f the world government m ovem ent The issue was not revolution, for both approaches were in principle revolutionary, in the sense of aiming to establish a new sovereign authority above those of the nation-states for a t least minimal common purposes. Grenville Clark cited the same precedent o f the U.S. Constitution for his proposals to amend the U.N. C harter as did Georgia Lloyd for a peoples’ convention. Even Vernon Nash, who threw up fear o f violent revolution to oppose the most radical popular approach, did not doubt that world government was something new in human history, which needed pop­ ular backing. A year later Harris W offord would be saying:” What is proposed is that federalists wake up to the fact that they have stum­ bled into man’s greatest peaceful revolution, and that they are its vanguard. It is the revolution to establish the brotherhood of man.

N o one, apparently, openly cited the precedents o f the French Revolution or the Russian Revolution, though term s like “constituent assembly” or “provi­ sional w orld government” would seem to be drawn from those historic cases. Deep down, everybody realized, with greater or lesser degrees of reasonableness, that federal world government was untried. W ho could tell what would happen if vast numbers o f people loosened their loyalties to their established governments? W hat new birth of freedom or decline into chaos might develop in a world constitutional convention? How could even a minimal world government, granted power only to prevent war, be established peacefully? There were the precedents o f all the other federal systems, but never one over such a “bedlam” o f peoples, to use Senator Vandenberg’s word, as the whole world. On the other hand, there was also a long history of war, and the next w ar, if atomic, threatened to destroy all civilization. To the people excitedly gathering in Asheville, the historical experiment was necessary. Their differences cam e down to a difference in temperament, in attitude, in courage, m anifested in the 12 Nash to Ruopp, 20 January 1947, his emphasis, ibid. ” Harris Wofford, “Dead End: Federalism Limited," Common Cause, 1 (M ay 1948): 388.

Formüllün of UnMftd Worid F#dtralsfs ■M l I M W I I Wi M M W V ff W IV I


two attitudes tow ard the people. One side feared th an , the other trusted them. One side preferred a “top-level” approach as the safest course; the other, an active field program as the only effective political one. One would work cautiously through governments, giving the people little to do but register their opinions (Nash was especially fond at this tim e of W orld Federalists’ “call-for-actioo” postcards), in order to provide for the most orderly transition to world governm ent The other, convinced that national governments were the great obstacle to peace, would seek to exercise the theoretical sovereign­ ty o f the people, in order to establish world government at all. The one, in mice,™ was the party of Hamilton, Lafayette, and Plekhanov. The other, that o f Jefferson, Robespierre, and Lenin. A t Asheville, the little w orld government movement decided to take the side of caution.

Foundation of United World Federalsts The W orld Government Congress opened at Asheville, N o th Carolina, on Friday, 21 February 1947. Two hundred seven delegates arrived on a snowy day for the m erger session, the largest of which was from W orld Federalists; perhaps SO came from other sections of the m ovem ent M ildred Blake, Tom Griessemer, M ax H abicht George H o lt Vernon Nash, Stewart Ogilvy, the Rawnsleys, M ark Van Doren, R itz R. von W indegger, and Robert W heelwright were among the W orld Federalists. The Americans United contingent included Cass Canfield, publisher o f H arp­ ers, who after Asheville would play an increasing im portant background role; Norman Cousins, editor o f the Saturday Review; Thomas K. Finletter, later Tru­ man’s secretary o f the air force; M rs. J. B ordai Harriman, form er U.S. ambas­ sador to N ow ay; Cord M eyer Jr., veteran assistant to Harold Stassen at San Francisco; J. A. M igel, Rhode Island industrialist; and A.J.G. Priest, New York lawyer and well-regarded convention chairman. Of Student Federalists, Helen Ball, Laurence Fuchs, Virginia Lastayo, Clare Lindgren, Colgate Prentice, Joseph W heeler, and Harris W offord w o e in atten­ dance. Thomas H. Mahony and Conrad Hobbs came from Massachusetts. W orld Republic was represented by R ed Carney, Charles H. Davis, Frances Duncan, Phillips Ruopp, Paul Sauer, and Jack W hitehouse.” Strength of Organizations Uniting The true strength of the various organizations in the movement was revealed by the credentials committee. M ost striking was Americans United, now down to few er than 5,500:

ML., “in its core”—an expression favored by Q. A. Borgese. ” List of Delegates and Observers, Asheville Convention, 21-23 February 1947, UWF Papers, 42.Asheville.








World Federalists 6,033 Americans United 5,498 Student Federalists 4,380 Massachusetts Committee 713 1,366 World Republic 37 Georgia World Citizens’*

84 34 69 7 11 2

135 107 107 16 52 2

24 13 19 1 3 1






Advocates o f a peoples' convention. Fyke Fanner and Fred Camey, were al­ lowed to give the keynote speeches on the morning of the first day. Then the congress got down to business, with the m erger session at the H otel George V anderbilt and the general session at the Battery Parie Hotel. A t the public meeting on the evening of the first day, all the speakers were advocates of U.N. reform: Norman Cousins, Frank P. Graham, Cord Meyer, and M ark Van D orm . Cari Sandburg, whose home was in Asheville, also spoke, but he sem is not to made any memorable poetic contribution to the immediate cause o f world federa­ tion. In 1936, however, Sandburg had written:” Man will never write, they said before the alphabet came and man at last began to write Man will never fly, they said before the planes and blimps zoomed and purred in arcs winding their circles around the globe Man will never make the United States of Europe nor la to yet the United States of the World No, you are going too far when you talk about one world flag for the great Family of Nations, they say that now.

StotumonT of Botofs The next day, Saturday, was taken up with the split sessions, and, when m erger proved not quite so easy to effect as planned, the m erger session ran over into Sunday. M ahony on Saturday presented the policy committee’s resolution, which was adroitly worded to exclude any notion o f a peoples’ convention:” MThe Georgia World Citizens were a small group who appeared by surprise and took no more leading part after merger. ” Carl Sandburg, The People, Yes (New York: Harcourt, Brace, 1936; renewed 1964), 240-41; (cf. 221-24). Used by permission. M Program, Asheville Congress, 21-23 February 1947, UWF Papers, 42.Ashe­ ville; Asheville—General Time Table, 21-23 February, 1947, ibid., S7.Student Di­ vision.

Formationof Untied World Foderalsts


Statement of Beliefs: We believe that peace is not merely the absence of war, but the presence of justice, of law, of order—in short of government and the institutions of government; that work! peace can be created and maintained only under world law, universal and strong enough to prevent aimed conflict between nations. Statement of Purposes: Therefore, while endorsing the efforts of the United Nations to bring about a world community favorable to peace, we will work to strengthen the United Nations into a world government of limited powers adequate to prev­ ent war and having a direct jurisdiction over individuals.

The committee also proposed the name ‘U nited W orld Federalists,” w ith the subtitle “for W orld Government with Limited Powers Adequate to Prevent W ar.”

UN. Rflform or PuoptaT Convention W ithin minutes it was moved and seconded by members o f W orld Republic that the words “strength«) the U nited N ations into a w orld governm ent" be changed to “create a world governm ent” Never in public controversy did more hang on one word. “The proposed amendment would indicate bypassing and working outside o f the U N," responded Mahony. “The committee felt that it was necessary to work through the instrument already at band in order to avoid dangerous delay in estab­ lishing world governm ent” Edgar Ansel Mowrer, formerly one o f the bitterest critics o f the U.N., added, “N ot to support the UN while it is the organization in the public eye and while it has a chance o f going ahead to the goal in view would be the sheerest folly.” “W orld Republic," Fred Carney defiantly replied, “cannot join the m erger if die proposed statement passes.” W hitehouse spoke sharply: “The issue is not the United Nations but how to get peace. Governments and men appointed by governments to the UN do not represent the people directly but represent various interests and are not qualified to make a constitution for the people o f the world.” “There is the right o f revolution," exclaimed Finletter, “but we haven’t come to that yet.” W hitehouse, unable any longer to contain his antipathy for the corporation lawyer, answered, “This is not revolution but a democratic method!” Student Federalists at this point acted as the peacemakers. Younger and more idealistic, they were amenable to a dual approach. Both Colgate Prentice and Harris W offord urged that the group not split on the issue.1* A t the afternoon session, after all sides had caucused in great heat, Mahony proposed a compromise. The word “primarily” would be inserted into the state­ ment, to read, “prim arily to strengthen the United N ations." There was a moment of drama when Norman Cousins o f Americans United said, “That will be acceptable ....” * Minutes of Congress, Second Day; World Republic Group Troubles [Helen Ball Notes?], 22 February 1947, UWF Papers, 57.Student Division.



The W orld Republic boys were still caucusing outside the reran and asked for a 10-m inute delay on the vote. In the interim Mahony reread the amended state­ ment. Finally the group returned. Carney spoke. “W orld Republic agrees to the amendment [‘prim arily'] and w ill merge organically, subject to approval o f their members in Chicago and o f the general public. But we are committed to a pro­ gram o f working for a peoples’ world constitutional convention and have funds earmarked for that purpose. W e w ill forgo the peoples’ convention program for six months. However, we should be allowed to carry on publicity for it w ithin the m ovem ent W e want a review convention held in six months to decide the effectiveness o f the present policy.” M ahony wanted no conditions, no six-m onth policy. C ord M eyer objected to earmarked funds and to propaganda for a peoples' convention within the merged m ovem ent Cousins and W offord urged compromise. The members were being asked rally to “keep their m inds open on the subject.” A six-m onth policy review convention was not unreasonable. On this understanding the policy, amended with the word “prim arily," was voted unanimously.40 A fter th a t agreement was reached quickly on the constitution. United W orld Federalists (UW F) was constitutionally not a federal organization, with strong state and local divisions, but a unitary organization, with decisive pow er con­ centrated in the executive council and committee, meeting between annual gener­ al assemblies, as in Finletter’s original design. This design was to prove an ob­ stacle to popular initiatives w ithin U nited W orld Federalists in the years to crane.

AMbfoto Years later M ildred Blake, one o f the founders o f W orld Federalists in 1941, looked back rat the formation o f United W orld Federalists in 1947 as a “m is­ take.” M erger m eant domination o f the popular forces of W orld Federalists by the prominent men in Americans United: They were men who already knew people in government, and who felt that they had some influence, and that that was the way to go about it ... And there were others of us who thought that it didn’t pay to lobby around in Washington when ... there was no constituent pressure to do anything about it at all. We felt that the workout in the country was more important than W ashington.

“I’m not sure that it would have berat at all harmful if we had all gone ahead hoeing our own row,” she added.41

MIbid. Carney’s speech reconstructed. 41 Minutes of Congress, Second Day; Mildred R. Blake, Reminiscences, pp. 27, 20, Columbia University, Oral History Research Office.

rovnrnonoı urareo wono rirurfins


UWF Action Rrogram On Sunday, the m erger, in the end w ithout W orld Republic, was accom­ plished. A resolution was accepted stating that a peoples’ convention was a “possible step” toward world government, but, when A J.G . Priest invited some member o f W orld Republic to make the formal motion for merger, W hitehouse refused, Carney was willing, and Ruopp was undecided. So Finletter made the motion. In the afternoon, the action committee finally made its report, largely based on Swing’s recommendations: The aim of die new organization must be to mobilize popular opinion and ac­ tion toward world government so that the local and national representatives of the people will be impelled to work! federalism by an irresistible force.

Town meetings, resolutions o f civic organizations, statements by local leado s , m ass petitions, area conventions, referenda, state legislation, polling o f con­ gressmen, pressure on congressmen, world government party planks, nomination o f candidates for national offices favorable to federal world government, and na­ tional legislation were the kinds of activities recommended. The national organ­ ization o f United W orld Federalists would work through the media o f communi­ cation, contact high officials, build up the membership, and in general promote the “dramatizing of the idea of world government” Unifad World Faderabts A t last the tim e came for merger resolutions from the separate organizations. Dramatically, the constituait organizations ceased their existence. H arris W of­ ford led off for Student Federalists: Resolved, that Student Federalists, Inc., is dissolved and merges organically into UNITED WORLD FEDERALISTS, Inc., in accordance with the bylaws as passed by the Asheville Convention.

Arthur Goldsmith declared that the board o f directors of Americans United for W orld Government had decided to merge. Tom Gries semer said that the mem­ bership of W orld Federalists had voted to merge. Tom M ahony announced that the M assachusetts Committee for W orld Federation would merge. The new ex­ ecutive council was elected. A motion was made that a telegram be sent to E. B. W hite o f die New Yorker declaring that his exhortation a fta Dumbarton Oaks had been fulfilled: “Federalists of the World, Unite!”*2 The outside world was slow to notice the formation o f a united federalist or­ ganization in the mountains o f North Carolina. Initial reports were somewhat confused about whether W orld Republic had merged, which it had n o t One o f the first editors to comment on the event, in nearby Charlotte, wrote: It is ironic that this little band of intellectuals should now bold virtually un­ contested title to the internationalism that has always been a part of the41 41 Minutes of Congress, Final Day; World Republic Group Troubles.



American ideal. This is a time when only “visionaries” hold out hope of one world in which men can lay aside their weapons and live in peace; “practical” men still cling to the expensive—and historically unsound—idea that the best way to avoid war is to prepare for i t ...The flame tended by the United World Federalists is weak and flickering, but it is one of the few lights in the spread­ ing darkness. We wish diem Godspeed.41*

W eeks now were to elapse while the incorporation proceedings were complet­ ed. United W orld Federalists did not even have a présidait until May. There were inevitable delays while the new national organization set up its offices, hired its staff, brought chapters into relation with it, prepared its plans, estim ated its budget, m et the press, and made its contacts.44

41 “Six Groups Project Federalist World,” New York Times, 23 February 1947; “Federalists Join in a World Body,” New York Times, 24 February 1947; “Light in the Spreading Darkness,” Charlotte (North Carolina) News, 25 February 1947. 44 Minutes, Executive Council of UWF, 17 May 1947, UWF Papers, 43.

13 The Truman Doctrine: Containment It was expected that the early postwar [period] would witness a degree of unity and good-will in international relations among the victorious allies never before reached in peace time. It was expected that the world would move rapidly ... toward “One World.“ ... No influential posons, as far as I remember, expressed the expectation or the fear that international relations would worsen during those years. —Harry Dexter White, Draft of statement on amendment of the Articles of Agreement establishing the International Monetary Fund, 19 May 1948. Quoted by Richard N. Gardner, Sterling-Dollar Diplomacy (1980), p. 7

Th« Truman Doctrine W e have considered how the U nited N ations m ight assist in this crisis,” President Truman remarked in his historic address to Congress on the Greek and Turkish crisis in M arch 1947. “But the situation is an urgent one requiring im­ m ediate action, and the United Nations and its related organizations are not in a position to extend help of the kind that is requited.” Henceforth the U nited States, Truman announced, would undertake the responsibility o f resisting ag­ gression anywhere in the world. This speech was the first open repudiation by a sovereign great power of Chapters V and VII o f the U N . Charter that gave to the Security Council joint responsibility for resistance to aggression.1 “Y esterday, M arch 12, 1947,” said Roosevelt’s form er vice-president and Truman’s dissident secretary of commerce, Henry A. W allace, in a broadcast to the nation, “marked a turning point in American history. Fellow Americans, it is not a Greek crisis that we face, it is an American crisis. It is a crisis in the American sp irit” The president said W allace, proposed a policy of “imperialism and pow er politics.” To resist Communist party expansion, the United States w ould give dollars, tanks, and guns to unpopular but anticom m unist regim es like the G reek monarchy, rather than channel reconstruction aid, trucks, and plows through im partial U.N. agencies to desperate peoples or so practice de­ mocracy that communism would lose its attractiveness to them. Am erica was assuming die role o f world policeman. W allace feared for the consequences o f this unilateral step: 1 "The Truman Doctrine,” 12 March 1947, Henry Steel Commager, ed.. Documents o f American History (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 9th ed., 1973), 2: 326.



When President lYuman proclaims the world-wide conflict between East and West, he is telling the Soviet leaders that we are preparing for eventual war. They will reply by measures to strengthen their position in the event of war.

M ilitary control, he warned, w ill pass into the hands o f élites. In the inter­ ests o f national security, the people’s civil liberties w ill be restricted. Defense budgets w ill hold down standards o f living. A constant war footing w ill divide fam ilies. U ltim ately, reliance on m ilitary solutions w ill sacrifice freedom at home and abroad.2 Th» Gold War Something like a state of war, characterized by preparations for total war, did follow the Truman doctrine. Ideological campaigns, economic competition, nar­ row pursuit o f national interests, rivalry for spheres o f interest, alignm ent o f al­ lies, a nuclear and conventional arms race—all the traditional practices, and some new ones, o f national power politics returned to take the place of the hesitant ex­ perim ent in keeping international peace under the United Nations. Only the lack o f direct m ilitary hostilities between the two surviving sovereign great powers has justified for the postwar period the term “Cold W ar."1 But Truman was not simply to blame. The alternative was lacking. Later, in the debate on the first $400 m illion appropriations bill for Greece and Turkey under the new policy, senator after senator, representative after representative, stated that the United Nations was inadequate. Senator Vandenberg, who two years before had opposed Senator Taylor’s W orld Republic bill on the ground that the U.N.’s continuous contacts ought to be allowed to develop, now admit­ ted that the U.N. “cannot accept this responsibility” o f m eeting aggression. T hirty-four others expressed at least a pious wish to strengthen the U.N., but only a few knew specifically how, and none thought the reform s could be ac­ complished in time to m eet the crisis. Representative W alter H. Judd (R., M innesota), who would later take a lead­ ing part with the United W orld Federalist resolutions, mentioned the need for en­ forceable world laws. Representative Brooks Hays (D., Arkansas), who would later join Judd, argued for adequate international force. Senator J. W illiam Fulbright (D., Arkansas) explained that, until powerful nations subject themselves 1 Henry A. Wallace, Address on American Foreign Policy, NBC, 13 March 1947, UWF Papers, 26. ’ Bernard Baruch, who had led the U.S. initiative to establish the international control of atomic energy in 1946, coined this term in an address to the South Caroli­ na legislature a month after Truman enunciated his doctrine. Baruch: The Public Years (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1960), 388. It was popularized by W alter Lippmann in a slim, critical study of George Kennan’s “X” article on “The Sources of Soviet Conduct” in July 1947, which publicized his earlier cable that had become the inspiration for the new containment policy. The Cold War: A Study in U.S. Foreign Policy (New York: Harper &. Bros., 1947), 29, 58-59.

lh « Trumen Dextrin* Contdnm snt


to definite rules o f law, there would be no other power to constrain them.4 The State Department, too, in answ er to a series o f penetrating questions from Senator Charles W. Tobey (R., New Hampshire) that ranged all the way to whether the departm ent would take the lead in proposing amendments to the Charter making the U.N. a federal world government, explained that the U N . provided for “the greatest degree of international cooperation now attainable.” The United States had to act alone, Assistant Secretary Acheson said, since “time would have been lost.”5* n o mW vor w ono roosranon There was no longer any time to make the United Nations Organization ade­ quate to keep the peace. Had there ever been time? A t San Francisco in June 1945, China and the small nations expressed willingness to lim it national sover­ eignty in the U N . Charter, but the United States and the Soviet Union would not accept the C harter without vetoes for them selves. Then atom ic weapons were first used in war. About the time o f Grenville Clark’s Dublin conference in October 1945, critics warned that a league o f sovereign states could never be re­ lied on for national security, but they were silenced by charges o f “scrapping” the U N . before it was even tried. W hen the U.S. plan for the international control o f atomic energy was actually introduced in the U.N. in 1946, formal proposals to reform the U N . in the direction of limited, federal world government were in hand, but they were ignored. By 1947, disputes between the United States and the Soviet Union about the independence of Poland and Eastern Europe, the peace treaties with Germany, Ita­ ly, and the Balkans, the future o f Greece, the outlet from the Black Sea, Iran, and China had produced such a crisis o f international security that there was hardly a thought of strengthening the common organization. Leadership was unprepared — “uneducated,” in W. T. Holliday’s view*— to undertake the novel w ork o f abolishing war by extending government over the whole world, especially in 1945. The significance of the Truman doctrine from a perspective o f world fed­ eral government is that it marked the end o f what potential there ever may have been to strengthen the U.N. Charter along the lines of voluntary lim itations o f national sovereignty by creation o f new world legal institutions. For the next few years, there would still be occasional opportunities for U N . reform , such as the continued negotiations over the American plan for control o f atomic energy in the U N . AEC, Secretary of State M arshall’s proposal to create an interim committee of the General Assembly between sessions to evade Rus­ sian vetoes (the “L ittle Assembly”), or the Security Council decision to take m ilitary action in Korea when the Soviet Union happened to be boycotting the Council and Assembly because of the U.N.’s refusal to seat Communist China. 4 U.S. Congress, Senate, Senator Glen H. Taylor, Strengthening the United Na­ tions, SCR-24, 80th Cong., 1st sess., 9 July 1947, Congressional Record, 93: 8 5 08-9. ’ Dean Acheson to Tobey, 31 March 1947, UWF Papers, 43. ‘ Holliday to Clark, 23 September 1946, Clark Papers, 21.10.



But the spirit in these departures from traditional diplomacy was rather that o f power politics using the forms o f the empty United Nations. Once the United States began a policy o f what was called “containment,” and the Soviet U nion its policy o f “anti-im perialism ” (they w o e both strictly policies o f defense, though offensive in capability), there was never any going bade to international control. It was in response to the Truman doctrine that United W orld Federalists, only weeks after Asheville, issued their first public statem ent UWF protested Tru­ m an’s om ission o f reliance on the U.N. and urged his adm inistration “to strengthen the United N ations by C h art» alteration into a world governm ent with limited powers adequate to prevent war.” Nothing was added about ju st how such an ideal could still be realized. Such a statem ent m ust have had a hollow sound to responsible American officials who were grasping for a response to Bri­ tain’s decision to withdraw from Greece at the end of March 1947.7 Origins of the Gold War öfter 1945 M any historians have traced the origins o f the Cold W ar, including John Le­ wis Gaddis.* Our purpose here is only to cast a sidelight from the world federal­ ist perspective. That perspective is indicated by a UW F study on the origins o f the Cold W ar prepared in about 1950.’ Trouble first arose over Poland, then ex­ tended to occupied Germany. Britain and France had gone to war over the inde­ pendence o f Poland, while Russia, for the second tim e in the 20th century, had been invaded by the Germans through Poland. Stalin demanded “friendly govern­ m ents” on a defensive frontier from Estonia to Yugoslavia (and Greece if he could get it), while the W estern Allies were determined not to lose the indepen­ dent and “democratic” governments in Eastern Europe that they had fought for. Between the U nited States and the Soviet Union through 1945 and 1946, there were fundamental disagreements about the peace treaty with Germany, oc­ cupation policy, and restoration o f a sovereign German national governm ent The latter was the m ost difficult issue. The U.S.S.R. wanted a centralized, so­ cialist Germany, based on the landholding peasantry and the industrial trade unions. The U.S. and Britain preferred a looser federalized union, like the W ei­ m ar Republic, that would guarantee political freedoms and safeguard against re ­ newed state control o f German industry. France proposed a thoroughly decentral­ ized agrarian state, with the Ruhr industries under U.N. control. The Russians, judging by their radio broadcasts, were extremely angry ov er the amnesties granted to German industrialists, “backbone o f Nazism and its w ar 7 “Object Lesson,” W orld Government News, April 1947, pp. 1-2. Statem ent signed by Grenville Clark, T. K. Finletter, Cord Meyer, Raymond Gram Swing, M ark Van Doren, and F. R. von Windegger. ' John L. Gaddis, The United States and the Origins o f the Cold War (New York: Columbia University Press, 1972); Gaddis, The Long Peace: Inquiries into the H is­ tory o f the Cold War (New York: Oxford University Press, 1987). ' UWF Research Staff, Early Notes on Origin of the Cold War, n.d., c. 1950, UWF Papers, 68.

1h« Tiumon Doctrine: Gonlcivmrtf


o f aggrandizem ent” A centralized Gennany would be able to “wipe out the Nazi party,” Russians argued, and to prevent turning the industrialized areas “into a colony o f A nglo-U .S. monopoly capital.” The Americans, on the other hand, publicized the view that a centralized Gennany had been the cause o f the last war, while greater power in the states o f a federation would ensure that “politically G ennany w ill remain weak and w ill never again be able to threaten the peace o f Europe and the world.”10 A ll sides seemed to agree that a revival o f German industry, w ithout its fram er political m anifestations, was essential to a reconstructed Europe. B ut they could not agree on the dem ocratic model for industrial Germany. The Americans preferred a political democracy like what they were accustomed to, which im plied free enterprise. They were quite indifferent to Communist doc­ trine that private capital dominates a free democracy, leading it inevitably to war, and they were willing to tolerate the return to positions o f power and influence in a reformed German republic of a large fraction o f former Nazis." The Russians, fra* their part, demanded an economic democracy closely allied w ith the Soviet Union. They quite clearly intended that their centralized state would socialize all German industry, and they were indifferent to W estern objec­ tions that a revolutionary vanguard of the working class, without having to face competing parties in free elections, w ill suffer the corruptions o f power, w ill de­ stroy the libraries on which economic prosperity depends, and ultim ately w ill end in a worse tyranny than Nazism. Since the ideological differences seemed ir­ reconcilable, the issue o f how best to reorganize Gennany—and by im plication how to unite the world—came down to a contest o f power.

bnpİGattons of the Gold War for Wodd Fadarafcm The problem of Germany’s future was fundamental to the Cold W ar. Ques­ tions o f occupation policy, the O der-N eisse border, protocols governing repara­ tions to Russia, freedom of speech and press and latitude for German criticism o f the Allies, exchange of information between the Allied commanders, Ruhr and Saar administration, the fate of the defeated country’s heavy industry, and, above all, political guarantees for any central German government were deeply disputed. These disputes appeared to the Russians to be grounded in secret W estern sym­ pathy for revived German m ilitarism ; to the Americans, in Communist expan­ sionism like that in Eastern Europe. There were also, in the years after W orld W ar n , many w orld-w ide disputes that cannot be understood as rooted so directly in differing conceptions of politi­ cal and economic democracy, but rather m ust be understood, within an interna­ tional “systran" lacking a common organization to keep the peace, as traditional rivalries between sovereign great powers for spheres o f influence, even though Americans especially tried to deny that they had any such ambitions. An international political scientist who was guardedly sympathetic to the movement for1* 14UWF Notes on Origin of the Cold War. 11 John H. Herz, “The Fiasco of Denazification in Germany,” Political Science Quarterly, 63, 4 (December 1948): 569-94.



world government, G yde Eagleton, early in the Cold W ar set out the com parable deeds of Russia and America with m agisterial impartiality, as follows. U .S. protests against Soviet influence in Eastern Europe were answered by ironical Soviet protests against U.S. influence in Japan. Objections to the con­ tinued presence o f Russian troops in M anchuria were matched by com plaints about American troops in China and about U.S. efforts to get strategic bases in Iceland and Greenland. Russian protests against British military action in G reece and Indonesia were countermanded by W estern opposition to use o f R ussian forces in Iran; in 1946 the Soviet Union actually withdrew, leaving a power va­ cuum in that strategic country on the Indian Ocean. Talk of internationalizing the Dardanelles and the Danube River was m et by suggestions that the Panam a Canal also be put under international administration. W hen the United S tates proposed before the U.N. Security Council to create its own trust territory fo r the Pacific islands captured from Japan, the Soviet Union did not exercise its veto, apparently regarding those islands as within the acceptable American sphere o f influence, analogous to its own claim ed sphere in Eastern Europe and th e Dardanelles.” Lastly, the atomic threat, which originally was possessed only by the U nited States but potentially by the Soviet Union too, was not brought under interna­ tional control in the U N . Atomic Energy Commission through 1946. In gener­ al, the failure o f the great powers to entrust the United Nations— or a stronger world government—with powers o f compulsory jurisdiction or m ajority rule u n ­ der some system o f popular representation m eant the return o f power politics, national armament programs, and the settlem ent o f international disputes by th e threat or use of force. So weak was die U.N. that, after its first year, m ost o f which was spent organizing its agencies and secretariat, its budget was cut from $30 m illion to $27.7 million—about one-fourth of what the U.S. State D epart­ m ent spent each day, or less than what New York City spent each year on its sanitation services.” UN. Intemarftonalsm betw een Natfonalsm and World Government Another source of federalist analysis in this early period was United N ations World, edited by Louis D olivet In his lead editorial, D olivet took a stand b e ­ tween traditional nationalists and advocates of world government:1 1*4 In our opinion, the first group does not take into account the deep anxiety of peoples everywhere, their dissatisfaction with the miseries o f the world, 11 Clyde Eagleton, Address at the Institute on World Understanding, Bradley U ni­ versity, 9 May 1947, UWF Papers, 33. Eagleton was the author of International G o v­ ernment (1932, 1947, 1957). M“State of World Organization,” United Nations World, March 1947, p. 50. 14 Louis Dolivet, “Hopeful Atmosphere,” United Nations World, February 1947, p. 39. United Nations World was a merger of Asia, The Inter-American, and Free W orld and began with a circulation of 65,000. This compared with 36,600 for World G o v­ ernment News and 12,000 for Common Cause at their height in 1949.

Th* Truman Doctrin* Contfainmanr


their sense of insecurity, their indifference to world organization, and, above all, the truly alarming disaffection among the peoples of the world with gov­ ernment in general. On the other hand, the second group eliminates itself, through advocacy of world government and nothing else, from the day-today struggle for the improvement of the present world organization. It elim­ inates itself, for instance, from the fight for international relief, disarma­ ment, freedom of speech, and the international bill of rights.

This criticism was near the marie, though nationalists did make some conces­ sions, in the U.N., to popular demand for peace, and world govemmentalists, to the extent they could do so without surrender of their principles, did support the U.N. and comment on the events of the day from the perspective o f their ulti­ m ate goal. United Nations World bridged these two e x tim e s in its coverage of w orld politics and hence became a valuable source for the history of the world government m ovem ent “The goal is the federation o f free peoples o f the world — tire instrum ent the U.N.,” concluded D olivet Th* Coming of th® Cold War by 1947 By 1947, “immense historical changes,” in the language o f the new watchdog journal United Nations World, were under way. The world was awaiting a redefi­ nition o f American foreign policy under the new secretary o f state, G eneral G eorge C. M arshall, who had ju st returned to the U.S. after his unsuccessful m ission to Chiang K ai-shek’s China. The Chinese economy, following with­ draw al o f American aid on M arshall’s negative rep o rt collapsed to that stage where the N ational government ordered all wealthy Chinese to transfer their money from overseas banks to Chinese banks or to exchange it for Chinese pa­ per. Inflation had reduced the value of the Chinese dollar to 1/12,000 o f the American dollar. C ivil w ar with the Chinese Communists over unification o f the country entered its final stage. In Indochina, a war of liberation between the French and the Annamese was expected. M alaya and Burma were in ferment over negotiations with Britain to end colonial rule. In India, Jaw aharlal N ehru’s Congress Party was losing ground to the leftists and Muslims, but independence from Britain seemed ap­ proaching. In the M iddle East, the Arab League had not succeeded in forming an Arabian federation. Palestine was again a crossroads of history—this tim e o f awakening Arab nationalism and the exodus of Jews fleeing the Nazi holocaust toward a Jew ish national homeland. G reat B ritain, bankrupt by the Second W orld W ar, as Churchill admitted, could no longer maintain its m andate over Palestine. The British Em pire was slipping away and with it B ritain’s historic role o f “balancer” of national states competing for world power. Into this va­ cuum o f w orld “responsibilities" the United States would move, while relin­ quishing its own claimed protectorate over China. W e have already seen that, in Europe, Britain was being forced by the finan­ cial drain o f its m ilitary operations to withdraw fro n Greece. In Eastern Europe, 1946-47 was the period o f what historians call “alleged” coalitions, though in



Hungary and Czechoslovakia “genuine” coalitions o f Communists and Socialists still were functioning. In Italy, Prime M inister Alcide D e Gasperi of the C hris­ tian Democratic Party failed to obtain from the United States more than half o f a loan he needed to stave off starvation in his country. In France, inflation, with IS tim es m ore francs in circulation than before the war, was wiping out every wage gain for the workers and reducing the peasants to black m arket o r barter transactions. Loans finom the United States and one for $250 m illion from the W orld Bank w o e inadequate to restore the balance o f payments, which were up­ set by imports o f machinery for reconstruction, coal, and wheat. The Commun­ ists and Socialists had split, while Free France's hero Charles de G aulle's m ove­ m ent o f "anti-political parties,” the Rassemblement Populaire Français, w as making gains on the rig h t The constitutional elections, scheduled for 1948, promised to be a test of whether the Communists or the G aullist rightists w ould join the Socialists in a coalition governm ent In Gennany, “renascent Nazi ten ­ dencies ... particularly in the form of anti-Semitism’’ appeared. There was m uch anticipation of the A llied Foreign M inisters’ conference in M oscow in M a rd i 1947 to decide Gennany’s fate. In Britain, the shaky Labour government decided to tell the people the "fu ll truth o f the econom ic situation.” Im ports o f tobacco, new sprint and ev en movies from hard-currency countries like the United States and Sweden had to b e curtailed and exports to these countries increased. The government was not even able to provide sufficient coal for its people during the hard w inter o f early 1947. For once, "heroic” Britons “queued up for the dole.” The Attlee government ex ­ pected world financial trouble when its current American loan was exhausted. Some even outside the U.S.S.R. feared a postw ar depression beginning in th e United States and spreading over the world.u It was while Secretary o f State M arshall was discussing Germany’s fate at th e Moscow conference of March 1947 that President Truman announced his doctrine o f aid to Greece and Turkey and, by implication, to all “free peoples who are re ­ sisting attempted subjugation by armed m inorities or by outside pressures.” T h e conference, undercut by the president’s belligerent speech, broke up without p ro ­ ducing any peace treaty. The United States had officially changed its foreign policy from cooperation with the Soviet Union, through the w ar and m ost r e ­ cently in the founding o f the U.N., to containment o f Communist expansion. End of th« Portod of Flux Thereafter, events followed clearly and rapidly in an acknowledged Cold W ar. W hatever “period of flux,” in Ambassador W illiam B ullett’s words, there h ad been at the close of the Second W orld War, when Americans and Russians h ad not yet made up their minds about what they thought of each other or where they would turn for safety, had surely passed. Throughout 1947, negotiations o v e r the international control of atomic energy in the U.N. AEC became obviously 15 “Roundup,” United Nations World, February 1947, p. 17; ‘Immense H istorical Changes," ibid., March 1947, p. 17; Louis Dolivet, “Inside Report on Europe,” ibid., July 1947, pp. 12-13, 54.

lh»TıumanOocM w: Conkinmenf


perfunctory. In 1947, the United States put itself on a new institutional footing for re­ newed total war. Trum an's loyalty order curtailed traditional freedoms o f speech and assem bly.1* The M arshall plan for the reconstruction of Europe was, like the Truman doctrine, conceived outside the United Nations and was expressly op­ posed to “governments, political parties, or groups which seek to perpetuate hu­ m an m isery in order to profit therefrom politically.”17 The N ational Security Act, which created the m odan Departments o f Defense, Army, Navy, and A ir F a c e , put American forces on a footing for total w ar." The Central Intelligence Agency was formed. In turn, the Soviet Union began its first ideological campaign in April 1947 to “correct” the thinking of the Russian and Soviet peoples about their wartime American ally." The Soviet bloc at Paris duly rejected the M arshall plan, partly because its economic clauses required opening the books of Eastern European and Soviet industries to American accountants, thus revealing the true state o f post­ war Communist econom ies.20 The Cominform, which replaced the Comintern (abolished in 1943 as a goodwill gesture to the W est), was established in Sep­ tember 1947. The Cominform, as its name implied, was a propaganda organiza­ tion aiming to coordinate Communist Parties, especially in Italy and France, in opposition to the Truman doctrine and M arshall plan. By the autumn o f 1947, the coalition governments of Poland, Bulgaria, and Romania had been definitely replaced by “monolithic” Communist governments; Hungary and Czechoslova­ kia followed in early 1948.21 One o f the casualties o f the emerging Cold W ar was the international project on behalf of world federal governm ent Cominform director A. A. Zhdanov made uncompromising speeches against world federalism:22 One of the directions of the ideological campaign, which accompany the plans of enslaving Europe, is the attack against the principles of national “ ‘Trum an Loyalty Order,” Commager, Documents o f American H istory, 2: 5 2 9-32. ” “The Marshal Plan,” ibid., 2: 532-34. M“National Security Act of 1947,” ibid., 2: 541-43. “ The All-Union Society for the Dissemination of Political and Scientific Know­ ledge (a body of 70 Soviet scientists, writers, and artists) was formed on 30 April 1947. “Let not our hatred of our foes grow cold ... while, like profligates, they spend billions of dollars in the m aking of atom bombs and for the preparation of monstrous war.” Mikhail Sholokhov (author of And Quiet Flows the Don), Pravda, 23 January 1948, quoted by Robert S. Bird, New York Times, 1 March 1948. It was this society that condemned the “incorrect” music of Dmitri Shostakovich and Sergei Prokofiev. “ UWF Notes on Origin of Cold War. * Encyclopedia Britannica, 15th ed. (1979), s.v. “Communism,” by L. B. Schapiro, 4: 1022. “ Quoted by Vera Sandomirsky, World Government without Russia, draft of article, n.d., c. 1951, Committee to Frame a World Constitution Papas, 10.7; “The Politburo Speaks,” World Government News, January 1948, p. 1-2.



sovereignty, an appeal to peoples to abrogate their sovereign rights, and the setting against them of the ideas of “world government.” The meaning of this campaign consists in covering up the unbridled expansion of American imperialism which unceremoniously interferes with sovereign rights of peo­ ples.

Zhdanov expressly identified the idea o f world government as the ideological spearhead o f American expansion directed against the Soviet Union: The idea of “world government,” which some bourgeois intellectuals of the dreamer and pacifist type have taken up, is being used not only as a means of pressure for the purpose of an ideological disarmament of peoples who defend their independence from the encroachment of American imperialism, but also as a slogan especially directed against the Soviet Union, which indefatigably and consistently defends the principles of genuine equality and of safeguard­ ing the sovereign rights of all peoples, great and small.

Nothing was said about the sovereign rights o f Poland, where this congress w as held. In newspapers, magazines, and books through 1947, a palpable reversal o f public sentim ents from wartime amity to hostility as if in preparation for a new war is evident A month after Truman’s speech, the independent United N ations World printed a “probable lineup" o f countries in case of general war. The W est­ ern bloc outnumbered the Soviet bloc by 414 m illion to 293 m illion in popula­ tion. But there were many neutral stales, mostly the continental European coun­ tries and India (435 m illion), uncertain states (259 m illion), and states on th e verge erf civil war, China, France, Italy, and Spain (570 m illion).21

Thu North Atfcrtlc Treaty In April 1949, with astonishing speed considering the revolutionary character o f the act, the United States entered into a defensive m ilitary alliance with G reat Britain and 10 other W estern democracies. The North Atlantic treaty is usually considered a watershed in American history, dividing the past from the future, fo r it aided the traditional foreign policy of the United States, memorably expressed in George W ashington’s Farewell Address, o f altering “no entangling alliances with Europe." Isolationism was not completely dead, nor had internationalism been unreservably accepted, but the United States took up a place in crowded E u ­ rope and, hence, in the shrinking intodependent modem world. A resolution by Senator Arthur S. Vandenberg o f 19 May 1948 preceded th e North Atlantic Treaty. Vandenberg was one of the architects of the bipartisan foreign policy who had hitherto opposed as premature any reform or strengthen­ ing o f the U nited Nations. His resolution was now expressed in the hig h est terms of “international cooperation through m ore effective use o f the U nited Nations." The president was explicitly advised that the sense of the Senate a p ­ proved such objectives as elim inating the Security Council veto from questions » United Nations World, April 1947, p. 15.

Th« Truman Doctrine: Containment


involving pacific settlem ent o f disputes, providing aim ed forces to the U.N., reaching agreement on disarmament, and even holding a general conference for reform of the U.N. Charter under A rticle 109. These were the sort of things Grenville Clark and others struggled for in 1946 and 1947. However, so far had the Cold W ar advanced by 1948 that such objectives were evidently presented as a cover (they were all conditional on “agreement”) for the operative objective o f establishing “regional and other collective arrange­ ments for individual and collective self-defense” under Article 51, which had been provided for ju st such m ilitary alliances as the North Atlantic treaty in case the United Nations should fail.24 United W orld Federalists’ state and congressional legislative initiatives o f 1948 and 1949 would be made in this ambiguous politi­ cal atmosphere. After the Czech coup followed the B alm blockade, the establishment of W est and East Germany, the Russian A -bom b, the victory of the Chinese Communist revolution, and the Korean W ar. President Truman had to relieve General Doug­ las M acArthur from his command in Japan and Korea when the general pressed too hard for “victory.” Truman explained to the American people, “In the sim­ plest terms, what we are doing in Korea is this: W e are trying to prévoit a third world war.” It was actually the determ ination on both the Soviet U nion’s and the United States’ parts to avoid direct m ilitary confrontation, which could so easily expand into total war—despite m anifest preparations for it—that fixed the term “Cold W ar'’ in the public mind for the state o f relations between the two superpowers.22

24 “The Vandenberg Resolution,” Commager, Documents, 2: 543. See Appendix H. “ W alter Lippmann, The Cold War: A Study in U.S. Foreign Policy (New York: Harper & Bros., 1947).

Conclusion to Volum e


Politics is the art of making possible that which is necessary. —Paul Valéry, 1945

Too lo i» and Too Few rp>e Truman doctrine maries a divide because it inaugurated the policy o f con­ tainm ent o f international communism, which endured for over 40 years o f the Cold W ar and represented a rejection o f the proposed policy of world federation. Still, until the Korean W ar, the new U.S. and W estern policy was subject to vigorous debate, which the federalists ottered warmly. But United W orld Feder­ alists were not effectively organized until two weeks before President Truman announced the new policy, so they were too late to have a m ajor effect on events. Others—some not professedly federalist—had more influence from the com­ ing of W orld W ar n in 1939 to the Cold W ar in 1947. These included Clarence Streit with his proposal of a union of democracies to overawe H itler and M usso­ lini; the British Federal Unionists struggling bravely during the Drôle de Guerre; W inston Churchill, who made a historic offer o f British union with France on the eve o f her capitulation to Nazi Germany on 16 June 1940; planners in the U.S. State Department, who explored the logic o f federation no less than inter­ national organization until by 1943 it was evident that neither the Soviet Union nor the United States would accept anything that was not expressly based on "sovereign equality” ; G renville Clark, who was highly placed and thought through the issues m ethodically before anybody; and the atom ic scientists, whose “international control of atom ic energy” m eant an atom ic developm ent authority that would have had many of the attributes of a world government. That the United States actually made an offer o f international control in the Baruch plan o f 1946 is surely an event that shows how far sovereign states would go tow ard political union in m odem tim es. The nearest analogy is Churchill’s offer o f union. It is true that the British prim e m inister’s offer has to be ranked with the series of historic events that is leading to European Union, while the Baruch plan has led at best to the series o f arms control treaties from the Antarctica treaty of 1959 to the latest START treaty of 2002, which are very



Ear in conception from a w orld political union. But the beginning has b e a t made. The deeper achievement historically in this early period is not that the w orld federalist movement, little organized as it was, can exhibit a beginning like the Philadelphia convention o f 1787, but that thousands o f people all over the globe began to reflect seriously about what would be necessary to establish peace, and they began to write a large literature to show the way (see Appendix J). The analogy is rather with James M adison’s study o f republican constitutions in 1786 and with the letters and dinner conversations o f the Founding Fathers in the years before Philadelphia. The U nited N ations was established by a kind o f grudging, cautious state compromise with the larger current of popular thought by 1945. Vital to the U.N. was that the United States led in establishing it, that the U.N. provided for two-thirds m ajority rule in every organ (qualified only by Big Five unanimity or veto in the Security Council), that national sovereignty was constitutionally lim ited by such a tw o-thirds rule, and that the Senate con­ sented to the U.N. Charter without reservations. The C harin' was all the soldiers and the bereaved had won from the war, but in the history o f international organ­ ization, it was a g reatn achievement than is commonly remembered today as its inadequacies are rally too evident Probably, Roosevelt could have dared m ore than W ilson by the end o f the Second W orld War. The peoples o f the earth demanded changes in diplomacy so that never again would there be another general war. Statesmen and politicians sensed the public w ill and declared that they were creating an international organization to m aintain intranational peace and security. Things then became unraveled from 1945 to 1947. The breakup of w artim e am ity with the victorious A llies came m ore quickly than m ost responsible people, like Bernard Baruch or Harry D exter W hite, ever imagined. G. A. Börgese of the Chicago Committee to Fram e a W orld Constitution, which began its deliberations immediately after Hiroshim a and Nagasaki, was astonished at the sudden reversal. Börgese wrote in M ardi 1947 that the committee could no longer base its deliberations on the assum p­ tion that “the Big Three hand in hand” would progress toward a world state. W ithout this assumption, it is very doubtful that the Chicago committee w ould have ever undertaken the project of drafting a world constitution. Atomic fear was a principal m otivation in the W est—and there were those who argued that only fea r would produce the size o f a public to unite sovereign­ ties—but in the East and what we now call the South, the demand for social and economic justice was far more important. The world federation o f the future would have to be based not merely on fear, but on solidarity with world citizens everywhere. Grenville Clark and Louis B. Sohn, for their part, continued to w ork after the start o f the Korean W ar in 1950, which they did not look upon as a ter­ minal event, but they knew they were writing for posterity. The lesson w ould seem to be that historic opportunities for fundamental revision o f international relations are not likely to last more than a few years. The next comparable op­ portunity would come at the end of the Cold W ar, after 1990.

Appendix A

Abbreviations and Acronyms


American Association for the United Nations Anti-Ballistic M issile American Civil Liberties Union Americans for Democratic Action Atomic Development Authority Atomic Energy Commission [U.S. or U.N.] Atomic Engineers o f Oak Ridge American Federation of Labor American Friends Service Committee Association o f Los Alamos Scientists Associated Organization Association o f Oak Ridge Engineers and Scientists Association of Oak Ridge Scientists Association of Oak Ridge Scientists at Clinton Labs Associated Press Association o f Production Scientists at Oak Ridge Association of Scientists for Atomic Education Atomic Scientists of Chicago Americans United [for World Organization or Government] Atlantic Union Committee Americans United for World Government Americans United for World Organization American Veterans Committee About (L., circa) Citizens Committee for United Nations Reform Council o f Europe Carnegie Endowment for International Peace



HE POLITICSOF WORLD FEDERATION Committee to Frame a W orld Constitution Central Intelligence Agency Congress o f Industrial Organizations Conscientious Objector Compiler Communist Party Communist Party o f the Soviet Union Commission to Study the Organization o f Peace Campaign for W orld Government Daughters of the American Revolution European Community [Communities] European Cooperation Administration [M arshall Plan] Emergency Committee of the Atomic Scientists Economic and Social Council [of the U J4.—not an acronym] European Coal and Steel Community Editor or edited. European Defense Community [proposed in 1952] European Economic Community European Political Community [proposed in 1952] European Recovery Plan European Union Following pages Federation of American Scientists Food and Agricultural Organization Federation o f American Scientists Federation o f Atomic Scientists Federal Bureau of Investigation Franklin Delano Roosevelt Federal Union Federal Union Research Institute Foundation for W orld Government General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade House Concurrent Resolution His (or Her) M ajesty’s Stationery Office Headquarters hi the same place (L., ibidem) The same person (L.) Intercontinental Ballistic M issile International Court of Justice International Labour Organisation International Nongovernmental Organization International Organization International Relations International Trade Organization (1948)

AppandbcA: Abbreviation* and Aoonyms ITU JFK LNA LNU MCW F MIRV M IT MNC M .P. NASA NATO NCAI n. n.d. NGO NO OECD OEEC


International Telecommunications Union John Fitzgerald Kennedy League o f Nations Association League o f Nations Union M assachusetts Committee forW odd Federation M ultiple Independentiy-targetable Reentry Vehicle M assachusetts Institute o f Technology M ultinational Corporation Member o f Parliament National Aeronautics and Space Administration North Atlantic Treaty Organization National Committee for Atomic Information Note No date Nongovernmental Organization National Organization Organization few Economic Cooperation and Development Organization for European Economic Cooperation [M arshall Plan] [continued as OECD] OPEC Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries ORES Oak Ridge Engineers and Scientists OSCE Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe passim Here and there (L.) PC Peoples’ Convention PCU Permanent Court o f International Justice PGA Parliamentarians for Global Action PWC Peoples’ W orld Convention [PC] PWCC Peoples’ W orld Constitutional Convention [PC] RAF Royal A ir Force SAC Strategic Air Command SANE Committee for a Sane Nuclear Policy SC R Senate Concurrent Resolution SF Student Federalists [later Student Division, UWF] SFFW G Students for Federal W orld Government [World Republic] SDI Strategic Defense Initiative TNCs Transnational Corporations UAW United Auto Workers UEF Union Européenne des Fédéralistes [became Union of European Federalists; same acronym] U .N . United Nations [Alliance or Organization] UNA United Nations Association UNCTAD U.N. Conference on Trade and Development UNCTC United Nations Center on Transnational Corporations UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization



UNO United Nations Organization UNRRWAU.N. Relief and Rehabilitation Administration UPU Universal Postal Union USAF United States Air Force UWF United World Federalists VE Victory in Europe [Day] VFW Veterans of Foreign Wars VIP Very Important Person VJ Victory in Japan [Day] WAWF W orld Association of W orld Federalists [successor to WMWFG] WBWG W riters Board for World Government WCA W orld Constituent Assembly [PC] WCC W orld Constituional Convention [PC] WCM W orld Citizenship M ovement WF W orld Federalists and World Federalists, U.S.A. WFA W orld Federalist Association WFG World Federal Government WFM W orld Federalist Movement [continues WMWFG and WAWF] WFUSA W orld Federalists, U.S.A. [same as UWF after 1969] WG W orld Government WGN World Government News WM W orld Movement [for W orld Federal Government, WMWFG] WMWFG World Movement for World Federal Government [later WAWF] WOMP W orld Order Models Project WR W orld Republic W SF World Student Federalists WTO World Trade Organization WWS Workers for W orld Security

Appendix D

Historic Federal Unions

United States o f America United Provinces of Central America G ian Colombia Mexico Switzerland Argentina Venezuela Camda Austria-Hungary Germany Brazil Australia Austria Czechoslovakia Russia (R .S.F.S.R.) U .S.S .R . Yugoslavia India Ethiopia Central African Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland Pakistan W est Indies Federation M alaya, M alaysia M ali Federation Nigeria Micronesia St. K itts and Nevis Connoros Bosnia and Herzegovina United Arab Emirates

(1787) (1821-38) (1822-30) (1824,1857,1917) (1848,1874) (1853) (1864,1947,1961) (1867,1982) (1867,1919) (1871,1919,1949) (1891) (1901) (1920,1945) (1920,1948,1960) (1922,1993) (1924,1936,1977-91) (1946,1953,1963,1974) (1949) (1952,1995) (1953-63) (1956,1962,1973) (1956-62) (1957.1963) (1959-60) (1960.1963) (1986) (1983) (1992) (1995) (1996)



Sources: Albeit P. Blaustein and Gisbert H. Flanz, eds.. Constitutions o f the Countries o f the World, 18 binders (Dobbs Feny, NY: Oceana, 1971- ), passim; Ann L. Griffiths, ed.. Handbook o f Federal Coun­ tries, 2002 (Montreal: McGill-Queens University Press, 2002).

FORMER FEDERAL UNIONS United Provinces o f Central America Gran Colombia Central African Federation W est Indies Federation M ali Federation U .S .S .R . Czechoslovakia

(1838) (1830) (1963) (1962) (1960) (1991) (1992)

FEDERALIST EXPERIMENTS South Africa Bunna Libya Peoples Republic o f China United Arab Republic Jadan -b aq Federation Cyprus Yugoslavia

(1910) (1948) (1951) (1954) (1958-61) (1958) (1960) (1991)

“Federalist Experiments” does not include proposed federations, like Sukarno's Malphindo (Malaysia, Philippines, Indonesia). Ireland and Puerto Rico were never incorporated into a federation, though the idea was discussed.

DECENTRALIZATIONS AND DEVOLUTIONS Italy Belgium Spain France Great Britain

(1948) (1980) (1982) (1982) (1997)

Source: Joseph E. Schwaitzberg, “The U.S. Constitution: A Model for Global Government,” Journal o f Geography, 86 (November-December 1987): 246-52.


douses in National Constitutions Limiting Sovereignty

EUROPE i. Austria A ft 9(1). The generally recognized rules o f International Law are valid parts o f Federal Law. (2). By Law or by a State Treaty which m ust be ratified in accordance w ith A rt 50(1), specific sovereign rights of the Bund can be transferred to intergov­ ernm ental institutions and their organs, and the activity of organs o f foreign states in Austria as well as the activity of Austrian organs abroad can be regulat­ ed within the framework of International Law. — (Constitution o f 1929, as amended on 1 July 1981.) 2 Boldum A rt 25 bis. The exercise o f given powers may be conferred by a pact or law on institutions craning under international civil law. — (Constitution of 1831, as amended on 29 September 1971.)

A rt 20(1). Powers vested in the authorities of the Realm under this Consti­ tution may, to such extent as shall be provided by Statute, be delegated to inter­ national authorities set up by mutual agreement with other states fra the promo­ tion o f international rules o f law and cooperation. (2). F ra the passing o f a Bill dealing with the above a m ajority o f fiv e sixths of the Members o f the Folketing shall be required. If this m ajority is not obtained, and if the Government maintains it, the Bill shall be submitted to the Electorate for approval or rejection in accordance with the rules for Referenda laid down in section 42. — (Constitution o f 5 June 1953.)



A "mono - 1--- 1 4.

Chapter 4a. ConsideratioD o f the Affairs o f the European U nion.... Section 54b. The Council o f State shall without delay send to the Speaker a communication on any proposal which has come to its notice for an act, agree­ ment, or other measure to be decided by the Council of the European Union and which otherwise pursuant to the constitution would fall within the competence o f Parliam ent — (Constitution of 1919; Parliam ent Act o f 1928; amendment of 31 December 1994.)

5. Rronoa Pream ble. On condition o f reciprocity, France accepts the lim itations o f sovereignty necessary for the organization and defense o f peace. — (Constitution o f the Fourth Republic, 1946.) Preamble. The French people hereby solemnly proclaims its attachm ent to the Rights o f M an and the principles o f national sovereignty as defined by the Declaration o f 1789, reaffirm ed and complemented by the Preamble o f the Con­ stitution o f 1946. A rt 54. If the Constitutional Council, the m atter having been referred to it by the President o f the Republic, by the Premier, or by the President of one or the other assem bly, shall declare that an international commitment contains a clause contrary to the Constitution, the authorization to ratify or approve this commitment may be given only after amendment of the Constitution. A rt 55. Treaties or agreements duly ratified and approved shall, upon their publication, have an authority superior to that of laws, subject for each agree­ m ent or treaty, to its application by the other party. — (Constitution o f the Fifth Republic, 4 October 1958.)6 6. Germany A rt 24. Entry into a collective security system: (1) . The Federation may by legislation transfer sovereign powers to inter­ governmental institutions. (2) . For the maintenance of peace, the Federation may e n t» a system o f mu­ tual collective security; in doing so, it w ill consent to such lim itations upon its rights o f sovereignty as will bring about and secure peaceful and lasting order in Europe and among the nations of the world. (3) . For the settlement of disputes between states, the Federation w ill accede to agreements concerning international arbitration o f a general comprehensive, and obligatory nature. — (Constitution o f 1949, confirmed by Unification Treaty o f 31 August 1990.)

AppendbtG douses in National Constitutions Limiting Sovereignty


7. G— ce A it. 28(2). To serve an im portant national interest and promote cooperation w ith other states, authorities may be vested by a convention or agreem ent in agencies o f an international organization. A majority o f three-fifths o f the total number o f members o f Parliament shall be necessary to vote the law sanctioning the treaty or agreem ent (3) . Greece shall freely proceed by law voted by the absolute m ajority o f the total num ber of members o f Parliament, to lim it the exercise o f national sover­ eignty, insofar as this is dictated by an important national interest, does not in­ fringe upon the rights of man and the foundations of democratic government, and is effected on the basis o f the principles o f equality and under condition o f recip­ rocity. —(Constitution o f 7 June 1975.) 6. M en d Art. 29(1). Ireland affirms its devotion to the ideal o f peace and friendly co­ operation amongst nations founded on international justice and morality. (4) . For the purpose of the exercise o f any executive function o f the State in or in connection with its external relations, the Government may to such extent and subject to such conditions, if any, as may be determined by law, avail o f or adopt any organ, instrument, or method of procedure used or adopted for the like purpose by the members o f any group or league o f nations with which the State is or becomes associated for the purpose o f international cooperation in m atters o f common concern. The State may become a member of the European Coal and Steel Communi­ ty ... the European Economic Community ... the European Atom ic Energy Com m unity.... The State may ratify the Single European A c t.... No provision o f this Constitution invalidates laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the State necessitated by the obligations of membership in die Communities, or prevents laws enacted, acts done or measures adopted by the Communities, or in­ struments thereof, from having the force of law in the State. —(Constitution of 1937, as amended by 1972.)

9. Hdy Art. 11. Italy renounces war as an instrum ent o f offense to the liberty o f other peoples or as a means o f settlem ent of international disputes, and, on con­ ditions o f equality with other states, agrees to the lim itations o f her sovereignty necessary to an organization which will ensure peace and justice among nations, and promotes and encourages international organizations constituted for this pur­ pose. — (Constitution o f 1 January 1948.) tO. Luxembourg Art. 49(A). The exercise o f the powers reserved by the Constitution to the legislative, executive, and judiciary may be temporarily vested by treaty in insti­ tutions governed by international law. — (Constitution of 1868, as amended on 10 July 1973.)



1 1 Natharfcndi A it 195(a). For the maintenance o f external or internal security, in extraor­ dinary circumstances, it may be decreed by, or in the name of, the King, for any part o f the territory o f the Kingdom, that the constitutional powers of organs o f civil authority in respect o f public order and the police are transferred in whole or in pari to other organs o f civil authority. — (Constitution o f 1815, as amended on 3 September 1948.) A it 92. Legislative, executive, and judicial powers may be conferred on in­ ternational institutions by or pursuant to a treaty, subject, where necessary, to the provisions o f Article 91, paragraph 3. — (Constitution o f 13 February 1983.) 1 2 Norway A n 93. In order to secure international peace and security, o r in order to promote international law and order and cooperation between nations, the Stort­ ing may, by a three-fourths majority, consent that an international organization, o f which Norway is or becomes a m em ba1, shall have the right, within a func­ tionally lim ited field, to exercise powers which in accordance with this Constitu­ tion are normally vested in the Norwegian authorities, exclusive o f the pow er to a lta this Constitution. F a such consent as provided above a t least tw o-thirds o f the members of the Storting— the same quorum as is required for changes in a amendments to dûs Constitution—shall be present and voting. —(Constitution o f 1814, as amended in 1952.)

13. Roland A rt 9. The Republic o f Poland shall respect international law binding upon it. Art. 89(1). Ratification o f an international agreem ent by the Republic o f Poland, as well as denunciation thereof, shall require p r ia consent granted by statute, if such agreement concerns: 1) Peace, alliances, political a m ilitary treaties; 2) Freedoms, tights a obligations of citizens, as specified in the Constitu­ tion; 3) The Republic of Poland's membership in an international aganization. — (Constitution o f 1997)*41

14. Portugal A rt 7(2). P atu g al commends the abolition o f all forms o f imperialism, co­ lonialism , and aggression; general, simultaneous, and controlled disarmam ent; the dissolution o f politico-m ilitary blocs; and the establishm ent o f a system o f collective security, in o d e r to create an international order capable o f assuring peace and justice in relations among peoples. Art. 8(3). The standards issuing from the qualified international organiza­ tions to which Portugal belongs shall direcdy be enforced dom estically, since that is expressly stipulated in the respective constituent agreements. —(Constitution o f 25 A pril 1976.)

AppandbcG QoumsinNationalConstitutionsLimitingSovereignly


15. Spain A it. 93. By means o f an organic law, authorization may be established for the conclusion o f treaties which attribute to an international organization or in­ stitution the exercise of competence derived from the constitution. It is the re­ sponsibility o f the Cortes Generals or the Government, depending on the cases, to guarantee compliance with these treaties and the resolutions emanating from the international or supranational organization who have been entitled by this cession. —(Constitution o f 29 December 1978.)

16. Sweden Chap. 10, Art. 5. The right to make decisions which under the present In­ strum ent o f Government devolves on the Riksdag, on the Government, or on any other organ referred to in the Instrum ent of Government, may be entrusted, to a lim ited extent, to an international organization for peaceful cooperation o f which Sweden is to become a memba*, or to an International Tribunal No right to make decisions in m atters regarding the enactment, amendment, or repeal of a fundam ental law or [to restrict] any of the freedoms and rights referred to in Chapter 2 may thus be transferred. The Riksdag shall decide on a transfer o f the right to make decisions in the manner prescribed for the fundamental laws or, if a decision in accordance with such procedure cannot be abided, by way o f a deci­ sion agreed upon by not less than five-sixths o f those present and voting and by not less than three-fourths of the Riksdag members. — (Constitution o f 1809, as amended in 1976.)

17. Switzerland A rt. 89(5). The entry into organizations o f collective security or suprana­ tional entities is subject to a vote by the people and the Cantons. —(Constitution o f 1874, as amended in 1982.)

LATIN AM ERICA 18. Arganlina A rt. 27. The Federal governm ent is bound to strengthen its relations o f peace and commerce with foreign powers, by means o f treaties that are in con­ form ity with the principles of public law laid down in this constitution. —(Constitution o f 1953.)91

19. Btazfl A rt 4, Sole Paragraph. The Federative Republic o f Brazil shall seek the eco­ nomic, political, social, and cultural integration o f the peoples o f Latin America, with a view to the formation o f a Latin American community of nations. — (Constitution of 1891, as amended on 5 October 1988.)



20. Gokxribto A ft 9. The external relations o f the state are based on national sovereignty, on respect for the self-determination o f peoples, and on the recognition of inter­ national law approved by Colombia. In the same manner, the foreign policy o f Colombia w ill be oriented toward the integration o f Latin America and the Caribbean. — (Constitution o f 5 July 1991.)

2 1 CostoRico Art. 121(4). Public treaties and international conventions extending or trans­ ferring jurisdictional powers to a communitarian juridical order for the purpose o f realizing common regional objectives shall require the approval of the Legisla­ tive Assembly by a vote of not less than two thirds of its entire membership. —(Constitution o f 1949, as amended on 31 May 1968.)

22 Cuba A rt 12. The Republic o f Cuba espouses the principles o f proletarian inter­ nationalism and o f the combative solidarity of the peoples a n d ... (g) aspires to establish along w ith the other countries o f Latin A m erica and o f the Caribbean—freed from foreign domination and internal oppression— one large community o f nations joined by the fraternal ties o f historical tradition and the common struggle against colonialism , neocolonialism, and imperialism, and in the desire to foster national and social progress. — (Constitution o f 24 February 1976, as amended to 1989.)

23. QSalvodcr Art. 89. El Salvador shall encourage and promote the human, economic, so­ cial, and cultural integration o f the American republics, and especially those o f the Central American isthmus. The realization of this [objective] shall be carried out through treaties or agreements among the interested republics, which treaties may contemplate the creation of organizations with supranational functions. El Salvador shall also promote the total or partial reestablishm ent o f the Re­ public o f Central America, in either unitary, federal, or confederated form, pro­ vided that democratic and republican principles are respected in the new state, and the essential rights o f individuals and of associations are fully guaranteed. The project and bases of union shall be submitted to popular opinion (con­ ference). — (Constitution o f 1983.)42 24. Guatemala Art. 150. Guatem ala, as part of the Central American community, w ill m aintain and cultivate relations of cooperation and solidarity with the other states making up the Central American Federation; will adopt adequate means to put into practice, in part or entirely, the political and economic unity o f C entral America. The competent authorities are obligated to strengthen Central Ameri­ can integration on the basis of equity. — (Constitution o f 1986.)

AppundbtG daususInNationalConstitutionsLimitingSovaraégnfy 25.



A it 9. Nicaragua firmly defends Central American unity, and supports and prom otes all efforts to achieve political and economic integration and coopera­ tion in the region. It also supports the efforts to establish and preserve peace in Central America. Nicaragua desires the unity o f the people o f Latin America and the Caribbean, inspired by the ideals of Bolivar and Sandino. Therefore, Nicaragua w ill participate with other Central American and Latin American countries in the creation and election of the bodies necessary to achieve such goals. This principle shall be regulated by the appropriate legislation and treaties. —(Constitution o f 1986.) 26. Paru Art. 103. W hen an international treaty contains a stipulation that affects a constitutional provision, it must be approved by the same procedure that governs amendments to the Constitution before being ratified by the President o f the Re­ public. A rt 106. Integration treaties with Latin American countries prevail over other m ultilateral treaties concluded among the same parties. — (Constitution of 1979, as amended by 1988.)

27. Venezuela Preamble. The Congress o f the Republic of Venezuela ... cooperating with all other nations and especially with the sister Republics o f the Hemisphere, in the aims o f the international community, on the basis o f mutual respect for sov­ ereignties, the self-determination of peoples, the universal guarantee o f the indi­ vidual and social rights of the human person, and the repudiation of war, con­ quest, and economic predominance as instruments o f international policy. Art. 129. In international treaties, conventions, and agreements concluded by the Republic, there shall be inserted a clause by which the parties bind them­ selves to decide by peaceful means recognized by international law or previously agreed to by them, if such is the case, all controversies that may arise between the parties.... — (Constitution of 23 January 1961.)

AFRICA 26. Congo A n 39. The People's Republic of the Congo subscribes to the fundamental principles and objectives contained in the Charters o f the United Nations and the Organization o f African Unity. A n 120. The People's Republic of the Congo may conclude agreements o f cooperation or association with other states. It is willing to create with them in­ ternational organizations for joint management, coordination, and open coopera­ tion. — (Constitution of 8 July 1979, as amended to 1989.)



29. Egypt Preamble. W e, the Egyptian people, in the name o f God and by his assis­ tance, pledge indefinitely and unconditionally to exert every effort to re a lize :... Union: the hope o f our Arab nation, being convinced that Arab unity is a call o f history and o f the future, and a demand of destiny; and that it cannot m aterialize except through an Arab nation, capable of warding off any threat, whatever the sources or the pretexts for such a threat. — (Constitution of 22 May 1980.)

30. GUnao Pream ble.... The people o f G u in ea... reaffirm ... its willingness to establish amicable relations and cooperation with all peoples o f the world on a foundation o f principles o f equality, respect for national sovereignty, territorial integrity, and reciprocal interests; its attachment to the cause of African Unity, [and] o f the sub-regional integration o f the continent. — (Constitution o f 1990.)

31 Md Pream ble.... The M alian people, aware of the historical and m aterial obliga­ tions which unite the States o f Africa, and anxious to achieve the liberation and the political, econom ic, and social unity indispensable to the assertion o f the African personality, affirm their determination to continue working for the total realization o f this liberation and this unity. —(Constitution o f 1974, amended through 1988.)

32. Rwanda Preamble. The people o f R w anda... resolved to contribute to peaceful coex­ istence between nations, to strengthened cooperation between peoples, and to the construction o f African unity.... Art. 44(8). The federation o f the Republic o f Rwanda with one or several other democratic nations must be approved by popular referendum. —(Constitution of 20 December 1978.) 33. Zaire Art. 110. In o rd a- to prom ote African Unity, the Republic may conclude treaties and agreements o f association which involve partial abandonment o f its sovereignty. —(Constitution of 1978, as amended on 5 July 1990.)

ASIA, AUSTRALASIA 34. Inda Art. 51. The State shall endeavor to— (a) Promote international peace and security; (b) M aintain ju st and honorable relations between nations; (c) Foster respect for international law and treaty obligations in the dealings of organized people with one another.

AppnndbcG Q cu m s InNaMonoiCorettfurtonsLimitingSovereignty


(d) Encourage settlement of international disputes by arbitration.... A rt 246. Parliament has exclusive power to make laws with respect to: (13) Participation in international conferences, associations, and other bodies and implementing erf decisions made thereat — (Constitution o f 1949, as amended to 1989.)

35. Japan A rt 9. Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on justice and or­ der, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right o f the nation and the threat or use o f force as a means o f settling international disputes. In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea and air forces, as well as other w ar potential will never be maintained. The right o f the belligerency o f the State will not be recognized. — (Constitution o f 3 M ay 1947.)

A rt 2(3). The Philippines renounces war as an instrum ent o f national poli­ cy, adopts the generally accepted principles of international law as part o f the law o f the land, and adheres to the policy of peace, equality, justice, freedom, cooper­ ation, and am ity with all nations. — (Constitution o f 1935, as amended in 1946 and 1973.)

37. Singapore A rt 7. W ithout in any way derogating from the force and effect o f Article 6, nothing in that article shall be construed as precluding Singapore or any associa­ tion, body, or organization therein from ...( b ) Entering into a treaty, agreem ent contract p a c t or other arrangem ent with any other sovereign state or with any Federation, Confederation, country or countries, or any association, body, or or­ ganization therein, where such treaty, agreem ent contract p a c t or arrangem ent provides for mutual or collective security or any other object or purpose whatso­ ever which is, or appears to be, beneficial or advantageous to Singapore in any way. — (Constitution o f 31 M arch 1980.)

W ORLD United States of America (propos«d) Whereas, war is now a threat to the very existence o f our civilization, be­ cause modern science has produced weapons of war which are overwhelmingly destructive and against which there is no sure defense: and Whereas, the effective maintenance o f world peace is the proper concern and responsibility erf every American citizen; and Whereas, the people of the State of California, while now enjoying domestic peace and security under the laws of their local, state, and federal governments, deeply desire the guarantee ow world peace; and



Whereas, all history shows that peace is the product of law and order, and that law and order are the product of government; and Whereas, the United Nations, as presently constituted, although accomplish­ ing great good in many fields, lades authority to enact, interpret or enforce world law, and under its present Charter is incapable o f restraining any m ajor nations which may foster or foment war, and W hereas, the Charter o f the United Nations expressly provides in A rticles 108 and 109, a procedure for reviewing and altering the Charter; and Whereas, the necessity for endowing the United Nations with limited powers rendering it capable o f enacting, interpreting or enforcing world law adequate to prevent war, and guaranteeing the inalienable tights erf freedom for every human being on earth and the dignity of the individual as exemplified by the American Bill o f Rights, has been recognized in the California State conventions and plat­ forms of both the Republican and Democratic parties; and Whereas, many states have memorialized Congress, through resolutions by their state legislatures or in referenda by their voters, to initiate steps toward the creation o f a world federal government reserving to the nations and to the people those rights not specifically granted as necessary to the establishm ent o f the maintenance of world law and order, and Whereas, several nations (Italy, India, France) have recently adopted constitu­ tional provisions to facilitate their entry into a world federal government by au­ thorizing a delegation to such a world federal government of a portion o f their sovereignty to endow it with powers adequate to prevent war, Now, therefore, be it: Resolved, By the Assembly and Senate o f the State o f C alifornia, jointly, that application is hereby made to the Congress of the United States, pursuant to A rticle V o f the Constitution of the United States, to call a convention for the sole purpose erf proposing amendment o f the Constitution to expedite and insure the participation o f the United States in a world federal government, open to all nations, with powers which, while defined and limited, shall be adequate to pre­ serve peace, whether the proposed charter or constitution o f such world federal government be presented in the form o f amendments to the Charter o f the United Nations, or by a world constitutional convention, or otherwise; and be it further Resolved, That the Chief Cleric of the Assembly is hereby directed to trans­ m it copies o f this application to the Senate and the House o f Representatives from this state, and to the presiding officers of each o f the legislatures in the several states, requesting their cooperation. — (D raft U.S. Constitutional Amendment, California Plan, 1949) (Passed in California, Maine, North Carolina, Connecticut, and New Jersey.)

AppondbcC Oausai ta National Corutttuttor* Limiting SovorsigrtTy 1 1 - t A ----- 1



uraroa nanons A il 2(2). All Members, in order to ensure to all o f them the rights and ben­ efits resulting from membership, shall fulfill in good faith the obligations as­ sumed by diem in accordance with the present C harm . A rt 25. The M embers o f the United Nations agree to accept and cany out the decisions of the Security Council in accordance with the present Charter. A it 43(1). A ll M embers of the United Nations, in order to contribute to the maintenance of international peace and security, undertake to make available to the Security Council, on its call and in accordance with a special agreem ent or agreements, aim ed forces, assistance, and facilities, including rights of passage, necessary for the purpose o f maintaining international peace and security. A rt 49. The Members of the United Nations shall join in affording m utual assistance in carrying out the measures decided upon by the Security Council. A rt 56. A ll Members pledge themselves to take joint and separate action in cooperation with the Organization for the achievement of the [economic and so­ cial] purposes set forth in Article 55. — (Charter of the United Nations, 1945)

Sources: Amos Peaslee, ed. Constitutions o f Nations. Rumford, NH: 1950; The Hague: M. Nijhoff, 2nd ed., 1956, 3 vols.; 3rd ed., 1965-70, 6 vols. Albert P. Blaustem and Gisbert H. Flanz, eds. Constitutions o f the Countries o f the World. Dobbs Ferry, NY: Oceana, 1971-, 18 binders. The Constitution Society: Notes: The recent constitution of Honduras seems to have elided earlier clauses providing for a return to the Central American Republic. The constitutions of Zim­ babwe, Zambia, and Malawi no longer contain traces of their aspirations in the Cen­ tral African Federation. Ghana and Senegal, though once members of the Mali Feder­ ation, have lost provisions for union in a West African federation. Tanzania, once the seat of the East African Community (1967-77) and the font of the ideal of an East African federation, also no longer provides for union. Neither does Uganda nor Kenya.

Appendix D

Archives and Collections

NORTH AMERICAN COLLECTIONS Americans U nited for W orld Organization (later Americans U nited for W orld Government). No known archives but some records in United W orld Federalists Papers, Cousins Papers, Eichelberger P ap as, and Hoover Institution on W ar, Revo­ lution, and Peace. Americans United were a m ajor com ponent o f U nited W orld Federalists on formation in 1947. Atlantic Union Papers. B u tta Library, Columbia University. P ap as o f a project under B ritain’s F edoal Union, supported by its secretary, Douglas Robinson, and directed by American W alden Moore, 1952-65. Pro­ je ct bad some influence on formation of NATO’s North A tlantic Assembly (1955) and the Organization for Economic C oopoation and Developm ent (1960). Atomic Scientists Papers. Regenstein Library, University o f Chicago: Association of Cambridge Scientists; Association o f Los Alamos Scientists; Association of Oak Ridge Engineers and Scientists; Association of Pasadena Scientists; Association o f Scioitists for Atomic Education; Atomic Scientists of Chicago (and Bulletin); Emergency Committee of the Atomic Scientists; Federation o f Atomic Scientists; Fedoation o f American Scientists; W ashington Association of Scientists.



Papers o f atomic scientists as they organized politically, after Hiroshima, for the international control of atomic energy. Barr, Stringfellow, Papers. University of Virginia, Charlottesville (?). P a p a s o f historian, co-founder o f S t John’s College’s New Program (great bodes), member o f the Committee to Frame a W orld Constitution, and direc­ tor of the Foundation for W orld Governm ent Baruch, Bernard, Papers. Seeley Mudd Library, Princeton University. Background o f the United States plan for the international control o f atom ic energy in the United Nations Atomic Energy Commission, 1946. Blaine, A nita McCormick, Papers. State Historical Society o f W isconsin. Foundation for W orld Government records, correspondence with Stringfellow Barr, Henry W allace, and others in world government movement and Progres­ sive Party; W orld Citizenship Association records. Blake, M ildred Riotden, Reminiscences. Oral History Research Office, B utler Library, Columbia University. Rem iniscences o f form ation o f W orld Federalists after split w ith Streit in 1941. W orld Federalists became the second m ajor com ponent o f U nited W orld Federalists in 1947. Buchanan, Scott, Papers. W idenor Library, Harvard University. Papers o f liberal educator, co-founder o f St. John’s College’s New Program (great books), leading advocate of world government, and supporter o f Henry W allace in 1948 Progressive Party campaign. Canadian Peace Research Institute Papers, 1945-77. Archives o f Canada, Tor­ onto, Ontario. Papers o f Norman Alcock, founder of the Canadian Peace Research Institute (1961), W illiam Eckhardt, Jerome Laulicht, and Alan and Hanna Newcombe, who began publishing Peace Research Abstracts in 1964. Includes corre­ spondence, office files, books, files o f abstracts, records of Canadian Peace Research and Educational Association (1968-76; Anatol Rapaport last presi­ dent), records o f World Federalists o f Canada (1948-77), and peace movement

Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Archives. Butler Library, Colum­ bia University. Extensive holdings on private groups favoring international organization, notably the Commission to Study the Organization o f Peace.

AppandbcD: A rch iv« and Gofedions


Clark, Grenville, Papers. Baker lib rary , Dartmouth College. Papers o f the New York lawyer, associate of Elihu Root Sr. and Henry L. Stimson, who became the "elder statesman” of the world government m ove­ m ent a f ta 1944. C lark was the leading proponent o f minimal or lim ited world governm ent Clayton, W illiam, L., Papers. Rice University. Papers o f architect o f North Atlantic Treaty and leading member o f the A tlan­ tic Union Committee. See also selected papers in edition by Frederick Dobner. Committee to Frame a W orld Constitution Papers. Regenstein Library, Univer­ sity o f Chicago. Records o f the Committee under Robert M. Hutchins and G. A. Börgese that issued the “Preliminary D raft o f a W orld Constitution,” a m axim alist docu­ m en t “Peace and justice stand or fall together.” Cousins, Norman, Papers. Brooklyn College Library, Brooklyn, New York. Papers on the Saturday Review o f Literature, Americans United, and United W orld Federalists. Culbertson, Ely, Papers. Yale U niversity Library, New Haven, Connecticut; Syracuse University Library, Syracuse, New York. Papers o f the famous bridge expert, who devoted the last years o f his life to what he called “world federalism.” Eichelberger, Clark, Papers. New York Public Library. Papers o f Eichelberger’s directorship o f the League o f Nations Association, Commission to Study the Organization of Peace, and American Association for the United Nations. Finletter, Thomas K., Papers. State Historical Society o f W isconsin, M adison. Papers of brains o f Americans United for W orld Government, occasional an­ tagonist o f Grenville Clark, and secretary o f the air force in Truman’s admin­ istration. Griessimer, Tom Otto, Papers. Tulane University, New Orleans, Louisiana. Includes his partially completed manuscript, “Force and Peace,” which con­ tains his m ost m atured thought on the use o f force to maintain peace, that is, on the problem o f government. Holt, Hamilton, Papers. M ills Library, Rollins College, W inter Park, Florida. Papers o f the founder of the League to Enforce Peace, who in 1946 organized the Rollins College conference on world government. Records o f the Insti­ tute for W orld Government, which came out of the conference, are also here.



Hudson, M anley O., Papers. Harvard Law Library (Langdell Building). Harvard University. Personal and professional papers o f law professor, judge, international m edia­ tor, and legal scholar whom the public reguarded as “Mr. W orld C ourt” Hutchins, Robert M , Papers. Regenstein Library, University o f Chicago. Correspondence with prominent citizens and leaders of the m ovem ent Lippmann, W alter, Papers. Sterling Library, Yale University. This sophisticated and shrewd political commentator saw the necessity for world government as early as the First W orld W ar. M ansfield, Connecticut, chapter o f U nited W orld Federalists. U niversity o f Connecticut Library, Storrs, Connecticut. This was a prom inent chapter with links throughout New England, 194S-88. Led by George C. Holt. (Lawrence Abbott’s papers went to Indiana U niver­ sity.) M orgenthau, Hans J., Papers. Alderman Library, University o f Virginia, Char­ lottesville. M orgenthau, like other teachers o f “realism " in America, including Cari J. Fredrich and Frederick L. Schuman, explained the transitory practice of pow er politics by reference to the eventually necessary world state. In 1978, he ad­ m itted to Francis A. Boyle that, in the nuclear age, continued avoidance o f departures like the Clark-Sohn plan were leading inexorably toward a nuclear Third W orld W ar. [See Boyle, World Politics and International Law (198S); and The Future o f International Law and American Foreign Policy (1989).] Mowrer, Edgar Ansel, Papers. Library of Congress, W ashington, D.C. Papers o f journalist who worked particularly with G renville C lark a t th e United Nations. Niebuhr, Reinhold, Papers. Library o f Congress, W ashington, DC. Includes records of his brief participation in the Chicago Committee to Fram e a W orld Constitution, followed by influential resistance to i t Notier, Harley A., Papers. U.S. National Archives, W ashington, DC. Records o f several State Department planning committees, including the A d­ visory Committee on Postwar Foreign Relations and the Subcommittee on International Organization. In N otier’s formal report, Postwar Foreign P oli­ cy Preparation, 1939-1945 (W ashington, DC: Dept, of State, Pub. N o. 3S80, General Foreign Policy Series 15,1949 [released February 1950]), it is revealed that the Advisory Committee briefly considered in the fall o f 1942 a “federalized international organization—or governm ent’’ See also F oreign

AppondxD: A rch iv» end Cotedtor»


Relations o f the United States, general volumes. Patterson, Robert P., Papers. Library o f Congress. Associate o f G renville Clark, secretary o f war, and member o f the A tlantic Union Committee. Roberts, Owen, Papers. Library o f Congress. Papers o f Supreme Court Justice and prominent advocate o f Atlantic Union. Schmidt, Adolph, Papers. University of Pittsburgh. Patent attorney and co-author o f The New Federalist. Schwimmer-Lloyd Collection. New York Public Library. Extensive collection on the Ford Peace Ship, pacifism, and w o ld government organizations. Rosika Schwimmer was the radical forebear o f the peoples’ convention approach to weald governm ent Shotw ell, Jam es T., Papers. Carnegie Endowment Archive, B utler Library, Columbia University. Papers o f the distinguished defender of the League of Nations and leading pro­ ponent erf the “realist” concept of international organization. Sohn, Louis B., P apas. Harvard Law Library (Langdell Building), Harvard U ni­ versity. M anuscripts, writings, correspondence (as with Grenville Clark) of law pro­ fessor, international organizer, and legal scholar. State Historical Society o f W isconsin Library, Madison. Like the Swarthmore Peace Collection, this archive is a m ajor repository on the peace movement, especially in opposition to the Vietnam W ar. Contains A nita M cCormick Blaine Papers and those of her W orld C itizens Associa­ tion, which led to the Foundation for W orld G overnm ent Stimson, Henry L., Papers. Yale University Library. M icrofilm, 1973. For Stimson’s “unguarded” views on world government to succeed the U.N., see letter to George W harton Pepper, 27 October 1947 (118). S treit Clarence K., Papers. Library of Congress. New York Times Geneva correspondent author o f Union Now, editor o f Freedom and Union, founder o f Federal Union in the United States, and in­ spiring genius of W orld Federalists. Papers include records of Atlantic Union Committee.



Swarthmore Peace Collection. Swarthmore College, Pennsylvania. M ajor collection in eastern United States, mostly pacifism , especially in op­ position to the Vietnam War. Includes Donald Keys’ U.N. papers. Szilard, Leo, Papers. Special Collections, University of California, San Diego. Papers o f one o f the most radical o f the atomic scientists, who vigorously ad­ vocated some form o f world government to control atomic energy. United W orld Federalists Archive. Lilly Library, Indiana University. Organizational files, including much correspondence, o f the mainstream m ass membership weald government organization in the United States. Additional m aterial on all branches o f the m ovem ent Vandenberg, Arthur H. Jr., ed. The Private Papers o f Senator Vandenberg. Bos­ ton: Houghton M ifflin, 1952. Relevant to U nited N ations, world governm ent N orth A tlantic Treaty (see especially p. 479). W arburg, James P., Papers. John F. Kennedy Library, Boston, M ass. Papers o f prominent New York banker and critic o f U.S. foreign policy. W eik, M ary Hays, Papers, 1921-79. University o f M ichigan at Ann Arbor. W ells, Hert>ert George, Papers. University o f Illinois at Urbana. M anuscripts and typescripts o f W ells’ books, letters to him, copies o f letters from him, press clippings, etc. W orld Citizens Association Papers. Regenstein Library, University o f Chicago. Files o f an organization that during the war supported the Commission to Study the Organization o f Peace. Some additional records in Blaine P ap as. W orld Federalists o f Canada Papers, 1958-75. Archives o f Canada, Toronto, Ontario. Correspondence o f W illiam M. Sheehan (president, 1958-61), general corre­ spondence (1961-74), national secretary’s files, financial records, conferences, ephemera, Canadian W orld Federalists (1961-68, complete), Arnold Simoni’s book, Beyond Repair: The Urgent N eed fo r a New W orld Organization (1972), and one audio tape o f addresses by Ross Smyth and Andrew Clarke. W orld Knowledge Bank. Academy o f W orld Studies, 2820 Van Ness Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94109. 80,000-item research file on world historical, political, economic, and social issues. Collected by Bennet Skew es-Cox, who took a broad view o f the trends, since the advent of nuclear weapons, toward federal world governm ent An invaluable repository o f primary sources for world history.

ApptndbcD: Ardtlves end Gofedtons


W orid M ovement for W orld Federal Government Papers. Regenstein Library, University o f Chicago. Records especially valuable for European branches of the m ovem ent W orid Republic Papers. Regenstein Library, University o f Chicago. Papers of radical veteran and student group, which for a time threatened tori* val United W orid Federalists with a grassroots popular movement for w orid governm ent W orid without W ar Council Records, Bancroft Library, University o f California, Berkeley. Records of Robert W oito’s group (formerly Turn toward Peace), which occa­ sionally gave a little notice to die world federalist movement. W right Quincy, Papers. Regenstein Library, University o f Chicago. Papers o f distinguished professor o f international law and leading political th eo rist whose thought provides a connective between U nited N ations and worid government supporters.

EUROPEAN COLLECTIONS Börgese, Giuseppe Antonio, Papers. University o f M ilan (?). Papers of hum anist a id e , professor of literature, anti-F ascist and leading spirit o f the Committee to Frame a W orld Constitution at the U niversity o f Chicago. Curtis, Lionel, Papers. Bodleian Library, Oxford University. Papers o f the founder of the Round Table M ovement (im perial federation), its journal The Round Table, the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chat­ ham House), and the Institute o f Pacific Relations. Author o f The Common­ wealth o f Nations (1916) and C ivitasD ei (1934-37). Prophet o f a world commonwealth. European M ovem ent Collège d’Europe Bibliothèque, B-8000 Bruges, D yver 11, Les Pays-Bas. Federal Union Archives. London School o f Economics and Political Science Li­ brary. Papers and reports o f Federal Union (1938-63) and the Federal Union Re­ search Institute (1940-43). Federal Union was a leading British public or­ ganization aiming to establish European, Atlantic, or world federation as a w ar aim in W orld W ar n. It had demonstrable influence on Churchill’s offer o f A nglo-French union to France on 16 June 1940. It was followed by the Federal T rust for Education and Research (1945- ) and W yndham Place



Trost (1963- ). Frances L. (“Jo”) Josephy Papers. London School o f Economics and Political Science. Papers o f a founder and long-term leader o f Federal Union, particularly in favor of European federation. Active in the European Union o f Federalists and in the European Movement. Liberal Party member. Lothian Papers. Scottish Record Office, Edinburgh. Records o f Philip Kerr (Lord Lothian by 1930), the Round Table M ovement, and Lothian’s lectures, notably Pacifism Is N ot Enough—N or Patriotism Either (1935). R.W .G. M ackay, M .P., Papers. London School of Econom ics and Political Science. Personal papers o f A ustralian-bom M .P. and leader o f Federal Union, the All-Party Parliamentary Group for European Federation, and the Parliamenta­ ry Group for the European M ovement (1947-62). Especially active a t the Congress o f Europe (1948) and with the Constituent Assembly o f the Coun­ cil o f Europe (European Political Community) (to 1951). Union Européenne des Fédéralistes Archives, c/o Movimento Federalista Europeo V iaS china26 1-10128 Torino, Italia; Mr. Sergio Pistone, 39-11-472843. W orld Federalist Youth Collection, 1946-68 (Copenhagen, Amsterdam) in per­ sonal possession o f Dr. Finn Laursen, Odense. W orld M ovement for W orld Federal Govemment/W orid Association o f W orld Federalists Archives, 1947-96. These apparently have been lost, but the record can be pieced together from m aterials in American repositories (like the Regenstein Library at the U niver­ sity of Chicago), Canada, and the organization’s journals, especially World Federalist. See also those o f Abbé Pierre (Henri G rouès-Piene, Paris), Guy M archand (Paris), Hendrik Brugmans (Bruges), Per Haekkerup (Copenhagen), H jalm ar Riiser-Larsen (Oslo), Lord Boyd-O rr (Glasgow), M onica W ingate (London), Patrick Armstrong (London), W alter Lipgens (books and articles), and the Bahà’f W orld Center (Haifa, Israel).

Appendix E

Interview s

Richard A. Falk, Letter, June 1976; Boston, March 1994; M arch 1997 Elisabeth Mann Börgese, Greenwich Village, NY, 8 July 1977 Louis B. Sohn, Harvard, 26 August 1977; W ashington, DC 19 June 1997 Arnold A. Offner, Boston, September 1977 Edith W ynner, New York, 26 August 1980,6 January 1982 Stewart Ogilvy, Yonkers, NY, 21 October 1980 Steven Benedict, Annapolis, September 1980; New York, 25 November 1980 Harris W offord, New York, 24 November 1980 Frances Fenner, Afton, NY, 30 November 1980 Max Habicht, Columbia Oral History, 1980 V irginia Lastayo Riorden, W illiamstown, MA 17 January 1981 M ildred (“M illy”) Riorden Blake, W illiamstown, MA, 18 January 1981 Shane Riorden, W illiamstown, MA 18 January 1981 Garry Davis, Letters, April 1981 Georgia Lloyd, Glencoe, IL, 3 May 1981 Charles A. Nelson, Annapolis, September 1981 Alan K. Henrikson, Medford, MA June 1983 W arren Kuehl, W ashington, DC, 3 August 1983 Lawrence W ittner, W ashington, DC, 3 August 1983 Charles DeBenedetti, W ashington, DC, 3 August 1983 J. Malcomb (“Jock”) Forbes, Cambridge, MA, April 1983,1987-99 W inston Langley, Cambridge, MA, April 1983,1987-99 Remfer Lee (“Jade”) W hitehouse, Chicago, 27 December 1984 Cord M eyer Jr„ W ashington, DC, 10 April 1985 John Logue, Cambridge, MA, May 1985 W alter Hoffman, W ashington, DC, 1985-90 Eric Cox, W ashington, DC, 1985-88



Bennett Skewes-Cox, New York, May 1985 Ervin Laszlo, New York, 1985 Ira Straus, W ashington, DC, 1985; Oxford, M arch 1990; W ashington, June 1997 Ronald J. Glossop, W ashington, DC, 1985-99 Lawrence Abbott, Northfield, MA, 1985 Finn L aunen, W oods Hole, MA, June 1985 Barbara W alker, New York, 1985,1997 Shunsaku Kato, London, 1985; W ashington, DC, 19 June 1997 Jean Francis Billion, London, 1985 Charlotte W ateriow, London, 1985 Lucy Law W ebster, New York, 1985-87 Edward Rawson, Amsterdam, 1986 Donald Harrington, New York, 1986 Maurice Bertrand, New York, 1986 Hermod Lannung, New York, 1986 René W adlow, Aosta, Italy, 1986 Philip Isely, Philadelphia, 1986 Stillm an P. W illiams, Northfield, MA, 1986 Donald Keys, New York, 1987 Andrea Bosco, New York, 1987 Norman Cousins, New York, December 1987 Jeanne D efiance (M rs. Clarence S tm t), W ashington, DC, June 1988 Hanna Newcombe, Dundas, Ontario, September 1988 Ralph Levering, M anhattan College, New York, 19 October 1988 Kenneth Boulding, New York, 19 October 1988 Elizabeth Cady Fenn, Arlington, V A January 1989 Lincoln Bloomfield, W ashington, DC, 1989 Gary Ostrower, W illiamsburg, V A 15 June 1989 Luck) Levi, Oxford, 27 M arch 1990 Archibald A. Evans, Oxford, 27 M ardi 1990 Alexandre M arc, Oxford, 27 March 1990 Guy Marchand, Oxford, 27 March 1990 Henry Usborne, Oxford, 27 March 1990 John Pinder, Oxford, 27 March 1990 John Roberts, Oxford, April 1990 Philip M orrison, Cambridge, MA 1990 Saul M endlovitz, W ashington, DC, 1993 Francis S. Bourne, W ashington, DC, 1993 E. Charles Chatfield, Boston, 1994 Erskine Childers, Boston, November 1995 W esley T. W ooley, W ashington, DC, 19-20 June 1997 R olf P. Haegler, W ashington, DC, 19 June 1997 Tiziana Stella, W ashington, DC, 19-20 June 1997 Alan Cranston, San Francisco, 5 October 1999

Index to Volum e 1

A Abbott, Lawrence, 276 ABC plan, 72: Culbertson plan not a government at all, 69,71 Abolition of slavery, 58 A bolition of war, 1 ,9 ,1 1 ,1 2 , 29, 30, 38, 41, 42, 51, 65, 102, 108, 120, 144, 168, 179, 180, 183-86, 189, 192,197, 204, 237 Acceleration o f history, 43 A cheson, D ean, 56, 96, 132, 180, 183-86,196, 237 A cheson-L ilienthal plan, 132, 1798 2 .184, 186-88, 192 Action Committee for a U nited States o f Europe, 15 Adjudication, 38,41 A di», M ortimer, 4 ,1 0 8 ,1 3 0 ,1 4 3 A dvisory C om m ittee on Post-W ar Foreign Policy, 95-104 Aeschylus, 27 Africa, 16, 37 Aggression, 41, 48, 69, 74, 75, 117, 162, 181, 193, 235 A ir force, 103 Alabama claims, 33 Albright, R. Mayne, 224 Alliances. See Balance o f power, North

Atlantic treaty Alternatives to Anarchy, 23 Amendment: to perfect unions or U N . Charter, 14, 120, 146, 156, 169, 199, 201-02, 216, 237, 245 American A ssociation for the U nited N ations, 38, 153. See also United Nations Association American Commonwealth, 34 American Diplomacy, 1900-1950,24 American Federation of Labor, 204 American Law Institute, 99 American Legion, 72,219 Americans U nited for W orld Govern­ m ent (originally Americans U nited for W orld O rganization), xii, 4, 65-66, 115-16, 142-43, 153, 154, 171, 175, 201, 216-17, 224, 2 2 9 30, 232-33,267 Anarchism (political), 34 Anarchy, 8, 12. 23, 3 1 ,1 0 1 ,1 8 4 , 225; causes war, 1 0 8,121,141,174 Anatomy o f Peace, 5 9 ,1 4 1 -4 3 ,1 7 2 Anderson, John, xiii Andrews, James, 172 Anglo-French union, 58 n, 73, 83-93, 168-69, 247 Anglo-German naval agreement, 48



Anti-communism, ix, 235 Apollo 11 photographs o f earth, 21 Approaches to peace, 22 Arab League, 241 Arbitration, 3 7 ,4 1 ,1 6 1 ,1 8 3 Argentina, 7, 200,207, 2 1 6,253,259 Armitrage, Richard, xii Arms control, 7 0 ,1 3 1 ,1 7 4 ,1 7 8 ,1 8 3 , 192, 247: build up to build down, 197 n A nns race, 129, 133, 174, 177, 193, 200, 210, 236, 240 Armstrong, Hamilton Fish, 96 Armstrong, John, ix Armstrong, Patrick, 274 Art, 26 A rticles o f Confederation, 1, 16, 29, 51, 5 5 ,1 4 4 Artzybasbeff, Boris, 170 Asia, 16 Association o f Los Alamos Scientists, 128,131-32 A ssociation o f Oak Ridge Scientists, 128,131, 217-18 A ssociation o f nations, 42; See also International organization; League o f Nations Atlantic Charter, 9 6 ,9 9 A tlantic federalists, 33-34, 52; S ee also Federal Union; Streit A tlantic M onthly, 142,144 Atlantic union, 73, 81,146-47 A tlantic Union Committee, 55-56 Atomic bomb, 1, 8, 60, 65, 97, 105, 107, 125, 127, 132, 143-44, 14647, 157, 164, 167, 190, 192, 204, 208, 213, 215, 223, 245: ju st another weapon, 193 n, 194 n Atomic control. See International con­ trol of atomic energy Atomic Development Authority, 13132, 177, 180, 182-83, 185, 187, 189, 192, 199, 210, 247. See also A cheson-L ilienthal plan; Baruch

plan; International control o f ato­ mic energy Atom ic Energy Com m ission: U .N ., 176- 77, 180-82, 188, 190, 192, 197, 199, 203, 209, 214, 217, 237, 240, 242; U .S., 137 A tom ic scientists, 3, 126, 127-39, 177, 179-80, 183, 201, 204, 217, 247,267 Atomic Scientists o f Chicago, 128 A ttlee, Clem ent, 5, 73, 77, 82, 154, 156,164-65, 179, 242 Austin, W arren, 206,208,213 n A ustralia, 7, 51, 68, 96. 120, 147, 168, 201, 206, 212, 253 Austria. 7 ,4 4 , 76, 253, 255 Axis, 50, 52, 55, 68 B Bahâ’f faith, 26,274 Bailey, Thomas A., 45 n Baker, Newton D., 37 Bakunin, M ikhail, 34 Balance o f pow er, 17, 43, 68, 116, 125, 141, 179, 181; community o f power, 47 Balderson, Jade, 130 Ball, Helen, 224, 226, 229 Ball, Joseph H., 156 Baratta, Joseph Preston, xiii, xv-xvi, 23 Baratta, Mary Florence, v, x Barr, Stringfellow, 4 ,1 4 9 ,2 6 8 Baruch, Bernard, 176-77,179,181-98, 210, 212, 236 n, 248, 268 B aruch plan, 1, 109, 130-32, 143, 177- 98, 201, 203-04, 2 1 2 -1 3 , 215, 219, 221, 247: n earest approach to a w orld governm ent proposal by the U.S.A., 178 Bases (strategic), 190,196, 198, 223, 240 Bass, Robert P., 145,147 Belgium, 7, 44, 48, 50, 85, 206, 254,

M a x to Volum » 1

255 Belt, Guillermo, 201,207 Benedict, Steven, 275 Bentham, Jeremy, 3 ,3 2 Beres, Louis René, 24 Berger, Samuel R., xi Berle, Adolf, 96,100 Berlin blockade, 190,245 Bernstein, Barton, 178 Bertrand, M aurice, x, 276 Bethe, Hans, 137 Beveridge, W illiam, 4 ,7 6 ,7 7 ,7 9 -8 0 Bevin, Ernest, 73, 78-79, 156, 159, 164-69,180, 208 Bidault, Georges, 6 Big Four (or Five), 102-04,115, 119, 156, 204, 248 Bikini tests, 193-94, 214 Billion, Jean Francis, 276 B ill o f rights, 30, 99, 241; See also human rights Binding triad, 14 Blaine, A nita McCormick, 4 ,2 6 8 ,2 7 1 B lake, M ildred R iorden, 3, 56-58, 215, 217, 229, 232, 268, 275 Blaustein, A lbert P„ 32 n Blum, John M „ 45 n Bloomfield, Lincoln, 276 Bohr, Niels, 137 Bolshevism, 39,43 Boité, Charles, 66,1 4 3 ,1 4 7 Bonhoeffer, Dietrich, 95 Borah, W illiam E., 4 1 ,4 5 -4 6 , 74 B örgese, Elisabeth M ann, x, 4,2 7 5 Borgese, Giuseppe Antonio, 3, 8-10, 13, 14, 21, 26, 43. 107, 218, 225, 248,273 Bosco, Andrea, 77,92 -9 3 ,2 7 6 Bosnia & Herzegovina, 253 Boston Globe, 151,152 Boston University, ix Boulding, Kenneth, 276 Bourgeois, Léon, 39 Bourne, Francis S„ 276


Bowman, Isaiah, 96,100-01 Boyd Orr, John, 4 ,2 7 4 Boyle, Francis, 23 Brandis, Henry, 224 Brazil, 2, 7, 206, 207, 212, 253, 259 Bretton W oods financial organizations,

100 Briand, Aristide, 92,166 Bridge (contract), 67-68 Britain. See G reat Britain B ritish Em pire, 241; See also Com­ monwealth British Parliamentary Group for W orld Government, 15,160 n Brown, Harrison, 66,128 Brugmans, Hendrik, 274 Brundtland commission, 22 Bryce, James, 34 Buchanan, Scott, 268 Buchler, Heidi, 172 Bulgaria, 243 Bullitt, W illiam C. J., 108, 179, 242 Burma, 7 ,6 8 ,2 4 1 , 254 Burrell, Sidney, ix Burton, John, 19 Bush, George H. W ., 9 Bush, George W ., xii Bush, Vannevar, 180,218 Business enterprise, 26 Byrnes, James F., 1 2 9 ,1 3 2 ,1 8 0 ,1 8 1 , 199-200, 216, 222 C Cabot, Henry B., 6 6 ,1 5 0 ,1 9 9 Cadogan, Alexander, 114 Cady, Elizabeth, 63 California plan, 263-64 Campaign for W orld Government, 107, 161, 172, 219 Canada, 2, 5, 7, 33, 51, 54 n, 68, 73, 162, 179, 212, 253 Canfield, Cass, 229 Cannon, LeGtand B., 109 C apitalism , 9, 16, 35, 36, 53, 157,



177, 222, 239 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 117,183,268 Carney, Fred, 171,229-33 Carpenter, Mrs. John Alden, 221 Carr, E. H., 23 Catholic opinion, 63 Catlin, George, 80 Cecil, Robert, 3 9 ,7 4 ,9 3 C enter for the Study o f D em ocratic Institutions, ix Central African Federation of Rhodesia & Nyasaland, 253,254,265 n Central America, United Provinces of, 7, 253, 254, 265 n Central Intelligence Agency, 243 Chamberlain, Neville, 85 Channing-Pierce, M elville, 76 Charter. See U.N. Charter Chatfield, E. Charles, x, 276 Checks and balances, 30 Chiang K ai-shek, 241 Chicago, University of, 127,130,133 Chicago committee. See Committee to Frame a W orld Constitution Chicago D aily News, 151 Chicago Stadium, 173-75 Childers, Erskine, 276 China, 2, 7, 13, 76, 96, 97, 105, 119, 122, 148, 155, 171, 190, 206-07, 2 1 2 -1 3 , 237, 240-41, 244-45, 254 Christendom, 28 Christian Science Monitor, 151,152 Churches, 63-64, 151, 175. See also Pacifism, religious C hurchill, W inston, 4 -5 , 56, 58 n, 61, 75, 76, 79, 82-93, 163-64, 16 8 -6 9 ,2 4 1 ,2 4 7 C itizens C om m ittee for U nited Na­ tions Reform, 72,219, 225 C itizenship, 93, 108, 110, 113, 169, 188,216. See also W orld citizens C ivilian control o f atom ic energy,

134-37. See also International con­ trol o f atomic energy Civil society, 34 Clark, Edward, 220 Clark, Eunice, 70 Clark, G renville, 2. 3, 8, 9, 13, 16, 24, 43, 54, 63, 65, 72, 75, 98, 109-17, 119, 145-56, 158, 160, 189, 196,199-202, 214, 216, 225, 228, 237, 245, 247, 248, 269 Clayton, W ill, 55, 269 Clinton administration, xi Club o f Rome, 22 Coalition, xii, 16, 25 Cohen, Benjamin V., 9 6,100 Cold W ar: origins, 3, 9, 13, 24, 55, 76, 91, 109, 111, 126, 155, 167, 169, 173, 177-78, 190, 196, 210, 235-45; end, xi, xii, 8, 9, 16, 17. 21, 22, 248 Collective security, 1 7 ,2 5 ,2 9 ,4 0 ,4 5 , 102, 106,119, 184, 191 Colombia, 120, 260 Colonialism (end), 21 Colville, John, 91 Cominfonn, 243 Comintern, 36 Commission to Study the Organization o f the Peace, 96,117 Committee to Defend America by Aid­ ing the Allies, 6 1 ,6 5 ,9 6 Com m ittees o f correspondence (like those o f Samuel Otis), 54, 57 Committee to Fram e a W orld C onsti­ tution, ix, 3, 10, 13, 14, 43, 72, 96, 108, 126, 218, 248, 269 Common action, 25 Common Cause, 218-19 Common M arket, 76 Common security, 9 ,1 8 ,2 1 . See also Security Commonwealth: British, 5 1 ,1 1 3 ,1 6 6 ; term replacing “Empire,” 34 Communism, 9, 16, 19, 34, 52-53

Indax to Volum »

C om m unist party, 13, 34-36, 32, 179, 191, 204, 235, 239, 241, 243 Competence, 23 Compton, A rthur H., 137 Compton, K aii, 133 n Compulsory jurisdiction. See Jurisdic­ tion Conant, Jam es B., 116 Conceit of Europe, 36 Conciliation, 37, 38,4 1 Condon, E. U ., 135,137 Confederation, 1, 3, 7 ,1 0 ,1 7 , 28, 29, 31-33, 68, 136, 144,196 C onflict resolution, 19,22 Congo, 261 Congress o f Industrial Organizations, 204 Congress o f Vienna, 36 C onnally, Tom , 105-06, 116, 118, 132, 155, 208 Conscientious objector, 118,121 Consensus, 20, 24, 25 Consent o f the governed, 101 C onstitutional am endm ent to perm it U .S. entry into a world federation, 149 Constitutional convention (world), 15, 116-17, 149, 160-61, 169. S e e also Peoples' convention C onstitutional Foundations o f W orld Peace, 25 C onstitutions, 10-11, 16, 21, 30,102, 113, 255-65 C ontainm ent policy, ix, 3, 10, 24, 190, 235-45, 247 Contract, to replace law in “anarchic” communities, 34 Conventional weapons, 183,188,193. See also N uclear weapons; W ea­ pons o f mass destruction Conway, Edward C., 151 Cooperation, 6, 25, 43, 83, 97, 98, 136, 161, 180, 194, 224, 237. See also Functionalism



Coordination. See Cooperation Cormoros, 253 Corporation, 224 Costa Rica, 260 Coudeahove-Kalergi, Richard N., 74 Council o f Europe, 5 ,7 6 , 8 2,104 C ousins, Norman, xii, 4, 142, 147, 220-32, 269, 276 Covenant (of League o f Nations), 3 8 4 0 .4 5 ,4 6 , 74, 98 Cox, Eric, 275 Cranston, Alan, 4, 66, 147, 151, 156, 167, 169, 199, 201, 207, 276 Crisis (needed to unite sovereignties), 26, 93. 147,151 Ciusade for W orld Government, 163, 171. See also Peoples’ convention Cuba, 120, 201, 206, 208, 260 Culbertson, Ely, 66-72, 118, 173-74, 219, 225, 269 Curry, W illiam, 7 6 ,7 7 Curtis, Lionel, 4, 33-34, 73, 76, 81, 84, 167, 273 Cyprus, 7, 254 Czechoslovakia, 6, 7, 49, 190, 242, 243, 245, 253, 254

D Daladier, Édouard, 84-85 Daniel, Cuthbert, 217 Dante Alighieri, 3, 28 Dardanelles. See Turkey Darlan, François, 8 5 ,9 0 Davenport, Russell, 66 Davies, David, 75 Davies, Joseph E., 107,153 n Davis, Charles Henry, 221,229 Davis, Garry, 275 Davis, Norman F., 96,103 Dean, Jonathan, 16 DeBenedetti, Charles, 275 Declaration of the Rights o f M an and the Citizen, 21 Defense: m ilitary, 111, 129-30, 138,



153, 178, 209, 213, 218, 236, 238, 244; none against atom ic bom b, 128, 131, 148, 149, 157, 180,188, 221; political, 221; right when U.N. Security Council can­ not act, 193. See also Security Defiance, Jeanne, 276 D elegation o f sovereign powers, 11, 12, 16, 17, 30, 3 1 ,4 2 Delian league of Greek city-states, 27 Democracy, 8-10, 13, 14, 16, 21, 22, 26, 34, 43, 45, 49-72, 100, 101, 104, 109, 146, 147, 161, 170, 215-16, 222, 223, 231, 235, 239: war for democracy, 43,45 ,1 7 9 De Monorchia, 28 Denmark, 51,255 Department of Peace, 172 Depression (economic), 2 6 ,7 5 ,2 4 2 Deterence, 1 0 ,1 1 ,5 0 ,6 9 Development (economic), 1 4 ,2 1 ,2 2 Devolution o f power, 100-01 Dewey, Thomas E., 112,115 Diplomacy, 22, 24, 3 6 ,4 4 ,4 7 ,1 3 8 D isarm am ent, 24, 41, 76, 101, 161, 166, 195, 203, 205, 207, 245: general and complete under effective international control,197, 208,209 D isputes: legal, 102; political, 111, 113 Diversity, 2, 8 ,1 7 , 22, 29 Divine, Robert A., 123 Dolivet, Louis, 240-41 Douglas, Lewis W ., 113-14 Douglas, W illiam O., 209 n D raft Treaty Establishing the European Union (1984), 5 Drinan, Robert E , 63 Dubinsky, David, 66 Dublin conference, 145-56, 167, 169, 199-200, 237 D ulles, John foster, 54, 56, 64, 112, 115, 198 Dumbarton Hoax, 160

D um barton O aks, 60, 105, 109, 114-17,147 Duncan, Frances, 229 Dunlop, Nick, 160 n E Eagleton, Clyde, 240 Early warning, 181,188,189 Earth summit, 22 East African Community, 265 n Eastman, Max, 67 Eaton, Charles, 215 Eberstadt, Ferdinand, 183-84 Ecological collapse, 26 Econom ic developm ent, 14, 21, 22: bond o f unity, 101 Ecuador, 120 Eden, Anthony, 156,164-67 Education, 26 ,9 3 , 108,133, 148,158, 185, 237 Egypt, 206, 212, 262 Eichelberger, Clark M ., 96, 101, 118, 153 n, 269 Einstein, Albert, 3, 2 3 ,1 2 5 ,1 2 7 ,1 2 8 , 134, 138-39, 143-45, 156, 173-74 Eisenhower, Dw ight D „ 56, 80, 182, 188 n Eliot, George Fielding, 153 El Salvador, 260 Emeny, Brooks, 23 Empire, 8, 142, 144. See also Imperi­ alism Energy, in a popular governm ent, 30-31 Enforcem ent: by international sanc­ tions or war, 25, 37, 43, 45-47, 102-04, 122, 181, 186, 194, 196, 198,214; by law reaching individu­ als, 30, 41, 99, 113, 115, 184-86, 188; by national courts, 184, 192, 196 Enlightment, 32 Entitlem ent quotients, 14 Environment (preservation), 19,21

index to Volume

Equality: o f individuals, 9 ,4 3 ,4 4 , SI; o f sovereigns, 48, 103, 105-07, 114, 204, 205 Equity tribunal, 75, 98 Essay towards the Present and Future Peace o f Europe, 28 Estaing, Valléry Giscard d ', 5 Ethiopia, 7 ,4 9 , 160, 253 European Community, 5, 6, 80, 82, 91 European federation. See European Union European Parliament, 5 ,1 4 ,2 9 European U nion, 1, 2, 5, 10-13, 17, 25, 28-29, 73, 76, 81, 82, 126, 163, 164, 167, 169, 247. See also W estern union European Union o f Federalists, 2 1 9 20, 273 Evans, Archibald A., 276 Evatt, Herbert V., 120,199

F Fadiman, Clifton, 6 6 ,173-74 Falk, Richard A., x, 16,25, 275 Farmer, Fyke, 164, 220, 224,230 Fawcett, C. B., 98 Fear: convential basis o f peace, 209; recommended motive for world fed* eralist movement, 154,248 Federal Council of Churches, 64 The Federalist, 7 ,2 1 ,3 1 Federalist socialists, 34 Federalizing the federalists, 176, 21819, 232 Federal Trust for Education and Re­ search, 76 Federal Union: B ritain, 74-82, 97, 108, 118, 163, 220, 247, 267, 273; U .S., 54-55, 97, 117, 146, 175, 225. See also Streit Federal Union Research Institute, 80 Federal Union: The Pioneers, 71 Federation (national), 2 ,3 0 ,1 3 6 ,2 3 8 -



39. See also W orld federation Federation o f A m erican S cientists, 132,136-37 Federation o f Atomic Scientists, 127, 132,135-36 Fenn, Elizabeth Cady, 276 Fenner, Frances, 171 n, 275 Ferencz, Benjamin B., 20 n Field, M arshall Jr., 66 Findley, Paul C., 56 Finland, 51, 68, 85, 250 Finletter, Thomas K., 4, 6 0 ,1 3 0 ,1 4 7 , 200, 216, 224, 229, 232, 233, 269 Fischer, Louis, 70 Fiske, John, 33-34 Forbes, J. Malcomb, 275 Ford, Henry, 5 Forsberg, Randall, 16 Foundation for W orld Government, 4 Four Freedoms, 99 Four Policemen, 102,106 Fourteen Points, 43 Fox, Howard, 78 France, 2, 7, 10, 11, 13, 21, 28, 39, 44, 45, 47, 48, 51, 58, 84-93, 119, 141, 167, 206, 212, 228, 238, 241-44, 147, 254, 256 Frank, James, 129-30 Frankfurter, Felix, 110 Franklin, Benjamin, 30 Fraser, Peter, 120 Freedom. See Liberty Freedom and Union, 55 Freedom of die seas, 44 Freeman, E. A., 34 Friedrich, Carl, 23 Frothingham, Francis E., 153 Fuchs, Lawrence, 229 Fulbright, J. W illiam , 6, 56, 59, 62, 105-06, 109, 143, 148, 236 Functionalism, 2 5 ,1 0 1 ,1 6 5 . See also Cooperation Future, 26, 51



G Gaddis, John L., 238 Gandhi, M. K., S Gasperi, Alcide de, 242 Gati, Tobi Trister, 19 n Gaulle, Charles de, 3 6 ,7 7 ,8 7 -8 8 ,2 4 2 Genocide, 20 George, W alter F., 36 Gerber, Larry, 177 Gerber, Norton, 223 Gerig, Benjamin, 96 Germany, 2 ,7 ,1 0 -1 3 ,4 1 ,4 4 ,4 8 ,4 9 , 51, 52, 69, 75, 96, 103, 114, 129, 162, 178, 191, 196, 215, 222, 237-39, 242, 245, 247, 253, 256 Ghana, 265 n Gildersleeve, Virginia, 118,153 n Global governance, xvi, 2 1 ,2 2 ,2 5 ,2 6 Globalization, xi Glossop, Ronald J., xvi, 2 3 ,2 7 6 Goldsmith, Arthur, 233 Goldstein, Joshua, 23 Good faith, 198,204 Goodhart, A. L., 80 Gorbachev, M ikhail, 6 ,1 8 n, 2 1 ,7 7 Goulding Marrack, 19 n Govemability o f the world, 19 Governance, xv Government, 31 Graham, Frank P., 224,230 Gran Colombia, 7 ,2 5 3 ,2 5 4 Grand Design, 28 G rassroots m ovem ent. See Popular movement G reat books, 4, 217 G reat Britain, 2, 7, 10,13, 22, 32, 39, 45, 47, 48, 50, 58, 69, 84-85, 89, 97, 105, 111, 144, 147, 164-69, 179, 206, 208, 212, 222, 238, 241, 242, 254: undoing o f Ameri­ can ill w ill, 33; no longer a great power, 169 G reat pow ers, 40, 44, 97, 100, 101, 113, 115, 138, 144, 165, 181,

190, 195, 205, 207, 235, 239-40 Greece, 27, 167, 190, 235-38, 2 4 0 4 1 ,2 5 7 Grew, Joseph C., 112 Griessem er, Tom O tto, 3, 56-61, 98, 117, 141,147, 201, 216, 220, 225, 229, 233, 269 Gromyko, Andrei A., 112, 114, 19196, 211, 212 Gromyko plan, 192-95 Groves, Leslie R., 132 Guadacanal, 64 Guatemala, 260 Guinea, 262

H Haas, Ernst B., 18 n Habicht, Max, 1 6 4,220,229,275 Hackworth, Green, 96,100 Haegier, R olf P.. 276 Haekkerup, Per, 274 Hague peace conferences, 37,192 Halverson, Robert, 172,174 Hamilton, Alexander, 31, 5 0 ,1 1 6 ,2 2 9 Hammarskjöld, Dag, 70 Hancock, John, 183,184,186 Hanford, 134,181 Harriman, M rs. J. Borden, 229 Harrington, Donald, 276 Harris, M organ, 122-23 Harvard University, 152 Hatch, Carl A., 156,209 n Havel Vâclav, 6 Hayek, F. A. von, 80 Hayes, Helen, 173 n Hays, Brooks, 6 ,2 3 6 Hegemony: o f U.S. declining, 18; of France, 28 Heinrich, Dieter, 20 n Henrikson, Alan K., 275 Henry IV, 3 ,2 8 , 36 Henshaw, Paul, 66 Herken, Gregg, 177 Herriot, Édouard, 89

Index to Volum »

H ater, Christian, 6 ,5 6 Heydecker, Joe, 12 Higinbotham, W illiam , 132,135 H iroshim a and N agasaki, 105, 109, 125-26, 131, 141-43, 145, 164, 174, 218, 248 Hitchcock, G ilbert M., 46 Hitler, Adolf, 8 9 ,9 1 ,1 4 1 ,1 6 8 , 247 H itler-Stalin pact, 48 Hoare-Laval agreement, 48 Hobbs, Conrad, 63,229 Hoffman, Paul, 222 Hoffman, W alter, 275 Holliday, W . T., 157-58, 237 Holt, George C., 157, 225,229 Holt, Hamilton, 37. 157, 269 Honduras, 265 n Hong Kong, 68 Hombeck, Stanley K., 112 House, Edward M„ 39 How to Think about War and Peace, 108 Hoyland, John S., 7 7 ,7 9 Hudson, M anley O., 270 Hudson, Richard, 14 Hughes, T o n , 62, 226 Hull, Cordell, 95, 98, 112, 114, 116, 179 Humanitarian intervention, 18,20 Human rights, 2, 9, 19, 20, 21, 26, 99-100 Humber, R obert Lee, 108, 118, 164, 172, 224 Humphrey, Hubert, 6 ,5 6 Hungary, 242,243 Hussein, Saddam, xiii Hutchins, R o b o t M ., 3, 8, 9, 13, 43, 108, 218, 270 Huxley, Aldous, 75 Hydrogen (su p a) bonb, 132,148,190

I Iceland, 240 Ickes, Harold L., 204



Idealism, 44 Illum inati, 8 Immigration, 14 Imperial federalists, 33 -3 4 ,7 3 ,8 1 Imperialism, 1 0 1 ,1 0 2 ,1 7 4 ,1 8 9 ,1 9 7 , 235.244 Implementation o f decisions, 26 Inagaki, M orikatsu, 5 Independence o f states, 122. See also Sovereignty India. 2, 5. 13, 68. 96, 155, 185, 241, 244, 253, 262 Individuals, 7, 18: distinguished in proposed w orld council, 100; law reaching to, 18,21, 30, 3 1 ,4 1 ,4 7 , 71, 113, 136, 138, 184, 186, 196, 214, 231; protected by hum an rights law , 20; responsibility of, 188; subjects o f intonational law, 20, 138; voting on the m erits, 189-90,200 Indochina, 241 Indonesia, 147,240 Industry, 26,4 4 Influence, 3, 7 ,1 2 ,1 5 , 29, 32, 34, 36, 40, 42, 53, 59, 60, 71-72, 75-77, 80, 82-84, 109, 121, 127, 128, 130 n, 132,150, 158, 161, 170, 178, 180, 216, 220, 232, 239, 247-48 Inquiry, 41 Inspections, 178, 180, 185, 191, 194, 207, 210, 212-13 Integration, xv, 25. See also European Union; Fedoation; Union Interdependence o f nations, 43, 53, 122.244 Interests, 1 5 ,1 8 ,2 9 , 30,4 3 , 7 5 ,1 1 4 International C am paign for W orld Government, 219,225 International conferences, 37 International control of atom ic energy, 1, 109, 126, 127-39, 1 4 S -4 9 ,153, 165-67, 177-98, 203, 204, 214,



215, 218, 237, 240, 242, 247. See afro Baruch plan International Court o f Justice (“W orld Court”), 37, 201,219 International Criminal Court, 10,20 Internationalism , 3 6 -4 2 ,4 4 ,1 8 5 ,1 8 8 , 217, 233, 244 International Labour Organisation, 43,

101 International law, 3, 22, 36, 38, 68, 100, 133, 138, 168, 184. See also World law International organization, 11,19, 24, 25, 36, 37-42, 46, 48, 63-64, 95, 97, 100, 103, 115, 179, 247, 248 International police force, 69, 71, 75, 102-04, 107. 113, 122, 149, 186, 219, 235 Internationals (working class), 34,36 International Telegraphic (now Tele* communications) Union, 37,101 Inter-Parliamentary Union, 162 Iran (Persia), 1 6 7 ,1 9 0 ,2 0 0 ,2 1 3 , 237, 240 Ireland, 51,185,257 Isely, Philip, 224, 276 Isolationism , 43, 44, 47-48, 98, 110, 122, 155, 189, 244. See also No entangling alliances tradition Israel, 13,27 Italy, 2, 7, 11, 41, 47-49, 51, 76, 85, 162, 222, 237, 241, 243, 244, 254, 257

Jensen, M errill, 55 Jews, 99,241 Joad, C.E.M ., 76,78, 80 Johansen, Robert C., 20 n John x x m , Pope, 5 Jordan-Iraq Federation, 254 Josephy, Frances L., 220,274 Judd, W alter H., 6,2 3 6 Jurisdiction: compulsory, 120,240; le­ gal or justiciable, 115. See also D isputes; W orld equity tribunal; World court Justice, xv, 9, 14, 21, 25, 31, 42-44, 47, 48, 98,126, 151, 157, 248


Kant, Immanuel, 1 ,3 , 3 2 -3 3 ,4 2 Karp, Carolyn, 172 Kato, Shunsaku, 276 Kefauver, Estes, 56 Kellogg, Frank B., 24 K ellogg-B riand pact, 24, 41, 74. See also Pact for renunciation of war Kerman, George, 24,196 Kennedy, John F., 6 ,5 6 ,1 2 0 -2 1 Kennedy, Joseph P., 86 Kennedy, Robert F., 56 Kenya, 265 n Keohane, Robert O ., 18 n Keys, Donald, 276 Kimber, Charles, 7 3 ,7 8 -8 0 ,9 3 King, Mackenzie, 179 King W illiam’s W ar, 28 Kittredge, W illiam R., 130 J Koo, W ellington, 206 Japan, 5, 12, 13, 41, 45, 47, 49, 51, Korean W ar, xvi, 15, 109, 190, 237, 52, 96, 125, 129, 130, 162, 177, 245, 247, 248 183,190, 196, 204, 240, 245, 263 Kropotkin, P et» , 3, 34 Javits, Jacob, 6,2 1 5 Kuehl, W arren, x, 3 7 ,4 2 ,2 7 5 Jay, John, 31 Jeanneney, Jules, 89 L Jefferson, Thomas, 7 ,2 6 ,4 4 Labour party, 156,163-64 Jenks,C . W ilfred, 20 n, 21 Lafayette, 229 Jennings, W. Ivor, 76, 98 LaFollette, Charles M ., 157

Index to Volum »

Laguardia, Fiorello, 173 n Langley, W inston, x, xv, 273 Lannung, Hermod, 276 Lastayo, Virginia, 226,229,275 Laszlo, Ervin, 276 Latin America, 1 6 ,6 8 ,1 8 9 Laursen, Finn, 276 Laval, P im e, 89 Law, Richard, 78 Law o f nations, 24 Law o f the Sea, 4 Law: reaching to individuals, 18, 21, 30, 31, 41, 47, 48, 71, 99, 113, 136, 138, 184, 186, 196, 214, 231. See also Rule of law; W orld law Layton, W alter, 98 Leach, James A., 19 n Leadership (American), 44,4 6 League o f Nations, 1, 3 ,6 ,1 3 , 24,29, 32, 36, 37, 42, 47, 49, 50, 68, 74, 84, 102, 168, 182: failed, 75, 95, 97, 106, 123, 125, 138, 195; re­ vived, 98, 107,179 League of Nations Union, 74,93 League of sovereign states, 1 0 ,1 1 ,4 8 , 106, 123, 136, 179, 189, 195, 237 League to Enforce Peace, 37-38,74 Lebrun, Albert, 88 Legalistic-m oralistic approach, 24 Legislation for individuals (real law), 31 Legislation for states (pretended), 31 Legitimacy, 25 Lenin V. I., 34-36 Leningrad, 96 Lennon, John, 35 Lesser peace, 26 Levering, Ralph, x, 276 Levi, Lucia, 276 Levinson, Salmon O., 74 Liberal education, 4 Liberalism, 19 Liberty, 1, 8, 9, 13, 28, 44, 45, 51,



147, 228, 236, 243: based on rule o f law, 32, 50 Libya, 254 Lie, Trygve, 173 n Lieberman, Joseph, 178 L ilienthal, D avid E., 132, 179, 180, 181,213 Lim ited world government, 112, 144, 200, 213, 218, 231, 237-38. S ee also M inimalism Lim its to Growth, 22 Lincoln, Abraham, 109 Lindbergh, Charles, 173 Lindgren, Clare, 229 Link, Arthur S., 3 7 ,4 3 n, 45 n Lin Y u-tang, 209 n Lipgens, W alter, 64 n, 274 Lippm ann, W alter, 39, 138, 236 n, 270 Litvinov, Maxim, 107,191 Lloyd, Georgia, 5 ,1 0 7 ,1 1 8 ,1 5 9 ,1 6 0 , 172, 219, 224, 228, 275 Lloyd, Lola M averick, 159-61, 219, 271 Lloyd, W illiam B ross Jr., 107, 118, 160, 162 Lodge, Henry Cabot, 38,46-47 Logue, John, 226,275 London, 152 Los Alamos, 1 2 7 ,1 3 0 ,1 3 1 ,1 3 3 ,1 8 0 , 181 Lothian, Lord (Philip K err), 4, 33-34, 73, 76, 81, 167, 274: L othian Foundation, 77 Louis, Joe, 192 Lowell, A. Lawrence, 37 Luck, Edward C., 19 n Luxembourg, 257 M M aastricht treaty, 5 M acA rthur, D ouglas, 125-26, 183, 203,245 Mackay, R.W .G., 76, 78, 98, 274



M adison, James, 1 0 ,3 0 ,1 1 6 ,2 4 8 M ahony, Thomas H., 57, 63-64, 66, 118, 145, 147, 148, 153, 229-33 M ajority rale, 30,119, 148,150, 184, 196, 204, 209, 226, 240 M alawi, 265 n M alaya, M alaysia, 7 ,2 4 1 ,2 5 3 M ali, 262 M ali Federation, 253,254,265 n M anchuria, 4 9 ,7 6 ,9 6 ,2 4 0 Mandate, 26 Mandel, Georges, 88 M anhattan project. 111, 130,143 Marburg, Theodore, 38 Marc, Alexandre, 276 Marchand, Guy, 274,276 M arines, ix, 108 n, 121,184 M arshall, G eorge C „ 56, 111, 216, 237, 241, 242 M arshall plan, 6 ,1 5 5 ,1 9 0 , 222,243 Marx, Karl, 34, 35 M assachusetts Com m ittee for W orld Federation, 63-64, 118, 217, 22930 M ass m ovem ent See Popular move­ m ent M aximalism, 14, 25, 50, 76, 161, 215 M axwell, Elsa, 70 M ayer, M ilton, 70 M ay-Jobnson bill, 134-37,143 Mayne, Richard, 54 n, 77,83 M cCarthy, Eugene, 56 McCormick, Anne O ’Hare, 116 McCoy, David, 4, 159,171, 175, 221, 227 McMahon, Brian, 135,137 McWhinney, Edward, 21 M em bership o f w orld federation, 9,

275 M icronesia, 253 M igel, J. A.. 229 M inimalism, 14, 16, 72, 112, 215 M inorities, 9 8 -1 0 0 ,1 4 4 ,1 5 0 , 205 M ixed system, 21 M olotov, V. M ., 180, 198, 203-04, 207-08, 214, 222 Money (world currency), 14,50 Monick, Emmanuel, 84 M onnet Jean, 5, 6, 15, 26, 80, 83, 8 4 ,8 6 ,9 2 M onopolization o f force, 9 M orality, 43 M ore perfect union, 10,29,51 Morgenthau, Hans, 23,270 M orrison, Charles C., 74 M orrison, Philip, 131, 137, 276 Morse, Wayne, 6 M orton, Desmond, 86 Moscow, 96,105, 152,189, 217, 242. See also Soviet U nit» Moses, Campbell, x Most great peace, 26 Movement. See Popular movement M owrer, Edgar A nsel, 66, 147, 199, 201, 231, 270 M ultilateralism, 25 M unich agreem ent 4 8 -5 0 ,5 4 M urray, G ilbert 74, 80 M urray, Philip, 66 M ussolini, 61. 160, 247 Myth, 10

N Napoleonic wars, 32 Nash, Vernon, 3, 56-57, 59, 64, 2 2729 112 National Council o f Soviet-A m erican Friendship, 204 M endlovitz, Saul, x, 16,276 M exico, 2, 7, 52, 100, 120, 206, 207, Nationalism, xvi, 8, 22, 5 2 ,1 8 6 , 223, 212, 243 240 M eyer, C ord Jr., 23, 66, 109, 118, National security. See Security 121-22, 143, 147, 184, 229-31, National service a c t 110-11

Index to Volume

Nazi party, 4 9 ,5 2 ,7 5 ,2 3 8 -3 9 ,2 4 2 Necessity o f a government, 9, 31, 32, 47, 53 Negroes, 99 Nehru, Jawaharlal, 5,241 Nelson, Charles, 217,275 N etherlands, 51, 85, 120, 167, 206, 212, 258 Neutral conference for continuous m e­ diation, 160 N eutrality (abolished by League o f N ations), 102 Newcombe, Alan and Hanna, 268,276 New Commonwealth Society, 75 Newfang, Oscar, 98 New York Herald Tribune, 153 New York Times, 151-52, 189 New Zealand, 5 1 ,6 8 ,9 6 ,1 2 0 Nicaragua, 261 Niebuhr, Reinhold, 270 N igeria, 2 ,7 ,2 5 3 Nisei Japanese, 100 Nixon, Richard, 6, 56,73 No entangling alliances tradition, 38, 4 4 -4 5 . See also N orth A tlantic treaty Non-hierarchical world system, 17 Non-governmental organizations, ix Nord, H. C , 220 Norms, 25 North Atlantic treaty (and NATO), 55, 155, 170, 190, 220, 244-45 N orth C arolina, 215, 224, 233. S ee also Humber N orthw estern U niversity, 4, 170-72,



O Oak Ridge, 1 2 7 ,1 3 0 ,1 3 3 ,1 8 0 ,1 8 1 Obligation, 20 “Obstruction in the guise of perfection­ ism,” 115-16 Offner, Arnold, ix, 275 Ogilvy, Stewart, x, 59, 223, 229, 275 One world, 2 ,1 0 , 35,118 One W orld or None, 3 9 ,1 3 7 -3 8 ,1 7 9 , 189 n Oppenheimer, J. Robert, 3, 131, 137, 180,184 Opportunity (historic), 108, 114, 138, 146, 162, 179, 181, 183, 186, 190-91, 201, 235, 237-38, 2 4 2 4 3,248 Order based on law, 141 ORES W orld Government Committee, 130-31, 217, 225 Orlando, Vittorio, 39 O tr, John Boyd, 76 Ostrower, Gary, x, 45 n, 276 Our Common Future, 22 Outlaw ing w ar or atom ic w eapons, 186, 191, 192, 214 Outline o f History, 49 Oxnam, G. Bromley, 66,153 n


Pacem in Maribus, 4 Pacem in Terris, 5 Pacific islands, 240 Pacifism: religious, 36, 75, 160, 272; sound. 2 3 ,1 6 2 ,1 6 3 ,2 1 8 Pact for the renunciation o f war, 24 Paine, Tom, 108,179 221 Pakistan, 7, 253 Norway, 51,258 Palestine, 185, 241 N o tta1, Harley A., 96,101, 270 N uclear union of liberal democracies, Palme, Olaf, 18 n 145-46, 150. See also A tlantic Panama canal, 240 Pan-American conference, 37,40,162 union N uclear w eapons, 16, 18, 26, 126, Pandemics, 26 Pan-Europa, 74 129,181; use is inevitable, 144 Parliam entarians for Global Action, 15 Nuremberg trials, 2 0 ,1 8 6 ,1 8 8 ,1 9 6



Parliamentary approach, IS, 159 Partialists, 13, 55, 145 Participation (political), 21-22. See also Democracy Pasvolsky, Leo, 9 6,103 Patterson, Robert P., 110, 271 Peabody, Endicott, 63 Peace, xv, 15, 17, 21, 22, 26, 27, 40, 42, 58, 103, 107, 111, 141, 147, 171, 183, 213, 215: based on ju s­ tice, 12, 25, 126, 157, 231; under rule o f law, 1 ,1 4 1 ,1 5 0 ,1 5 7 , 231; w ill come through w orld govern­ m ent, 108, 150, 172, 183, 209, 227-29, 231, 248 Peace ballot, 74,9 3 Peace Corps, 4 Peaceful settlem ent o f disputes, 19, 3 7 ,4 0 ,4 8 Peacekeeping, 25 Peace making, 25 Peace o f W estphalia, 22 Peace Pledge Union, 74 Peck, George, 218 Peck, Lawrence F„ 154 Penn, W illiam, 3, 28-29 Peoples’ convention, 15, 126, 156, 159-76, 215, 220, 225, 227-28, 230-32 Pepper, Claude, 6 ,1 5 6 Period o f flux, 108-09, 242-43. See also Opportunity Perpetual Peace, 29,32 Persian G ulf crisis, xiii Peru, 261 Pétain, Philippe, 58 n, 85, 89 Petition (right of), 99-100,156 Philadelphia convention, 14, 16, 30, 31, 227, 248 Philippines, 203-05, 263 Pinder, John, 54 n, 77, 83,92, 276 Pius x n . Pope, 63 Plan fo r Universal and Perpetual Peace, 32

Plattsburgh movement, 110,116,217 Plekhanov, Georgi V., 229 Pleven, René, 86, 88 Poland (and Eastern Europe), 49, 68, 76, 120, 167, 190, 198, 206, 212, 215, 221, 238, 240, 243, 244, 258 Policy: national or organizational, 17, 25, 101, 108, 141, 164-66, 181, 186, 216, 220, 224, 225, 235-45, 248; practical. 1, 3, 42, 51, 201, 234 Political lobby, 224, 232-33 Political party, 15,174, 226, 227 Political questions, 38 Political w ill, 25, 41, 50, 83, 100, 148, 170, 171, 174, 225 Politics (dom estic and world), 2, 23, 129 Politics o f World Federation, 2 Pop politics, 34, 187 Popular movement, 2, 10, 25, 58, 73, 93. 118, 121, 146, 154, 157, 158, 171, 216, 221, 224, 225, 227, 229, 232-33: principles, 176 Popular sovereignty, 7, 9, 30, 31, 43, 51, 71, 75, 93, 98, 102, 126, 142, 168, 188, 216, 220, 228-29. See also Sovereignty Portugal, 258 Potts, R. Frazier, 57 Powers: to be delegated to a world fed­ eration, 14, 25, 50, 102-04, 112, 158; gained by union, 16; organized to secure peace, 75; realities, 23, 24; tend to gravitate to center, 113 Power politics, 179,236-37: returning with disappointm ent in U.N ., 116, 205, 219, 235 Preliminary Draft o f a World Constitu­ tion, ix, 10 Prentice, Colgate, 229,231 Preponderance of power, 51-52,69 Press, 200 Preventive diplomacy, 19,25

Indax lo Votum» 1 Preventive war, 139,219 Priest, A J.G ., 66, 229, 233 Problématique, 19,26 Protestant opinion o f world federation, 64 Proudhon, Pierre-Joseph, 34 Psychology, 68 Public opinion, 45, 7 4 ,1 0 6 ,1 8 9 , 194 n. See also Popular sovereign­ ty; Political will Punishm ent See Enforcement

Q Q uota Force plan, 68, 70, 219; S ee also Culbertson; Arms control ft

Rabi, 1.1., 184 n Rabinowitch, Eugene, 128 Racism, 21, 5 2 ,1 5 0 ,1 7 4 Randolph, Jennings, 172 Ransome, Patrick, 73, 78-80 Rawnsley, Derek, 73,76, 79-80,163 Rawnsley, Noel and V io let 76, 163, 165, 229 Rawson, Edward, 276 Reader’s Digest, 142,172 Reagan, Ronald, xii, 221 Realism, 15, 21, 23 ,6 5 , 103 Realists, 4 ,2 3 , 24,177; world federal­ ists the realists, 11,108, 178, 200 n Realpolitik, 18, 70 Reason, 31, 32 Reconstruction, 191, 235, 239, 243 Regime, 26 Regional approach, 2 4 ,1 0 0 ,1 0 4 ,1 6 7 , 245 Regulation o f world commerce, 14,50 Religion, 26,4 2 . See also Churches Representation in a w orld federation, 13, 14, 22, 30, 31, 98, 101, 104, 112-15, 119, 148, 189, 200, 205, 209, 214, 240


Republican governm ent, 30, 32, 45, 51 Reservations, 46-47,248 Resistance m ovement (in W orld W ar n ),7 6 Reston, James, 114,115 Reves, Em ery, 59, 141-43, 147, 148, 172, 209 n Review conference (A rticle 109 o f U.N. Charter), 15-16,120 Revolution, 9, 14-16, 34, 35, 42, 50, 53, 129, 146, 147, 156, 160, 163, 180, 183, 196, 227-28, 231, 244: revolution to establish politically the brotherhood of man, 228; right of, 231 Reynaud, Paul, 56, 58 n, 8 6 ,9 1 ,9 2 Rhineland, 41 ,4 9 , 76 Rhine River Commission, 37 R ight (to W ilson), 44, 47. See also Justice; M orality; Human rights Right of secession, 36 Rights of the people, 50. See also Hu­ man rights; Liberty Riotden, Shane, 275 Robbins, Lionel, 4, 76, 80 R obots, John, 276 Roberts, Owen J., 3, 55, 59, 98, 142, 143, 145, 147, 149-51,153, 271 R obotson, Pat, 8 R ockefello, Nelson, 56 Rockets, 132, 134, 218 Rodino, Peter, 6 Rollins College conference, 37, 146, 156-58, 225 Roman empire, 27 ,2 8 Romania, 44, 243 Romulo, Carlos P., 199, 203-09 Roosevelt, Eleanor, 62,107 Roosevelt, Franklin D., 2, 43, 46, 56, 60, 80, 86, 95, 98, 102, 106, 109, 110, 116, 128, 182, 215, 248 Root, Elihu Jr., 110 Root, Elihu Sr., 110



Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, 2 8 ,2 9 ,4 2 Royal Institute o f International Affairs, 84 Ruggie, John, 19 n Rule o f law, 1, 4, 9, 10, 11, 17, 26, 31, 32, 43, 45, 72, 76, 99, 103, 167,211,236: basis for organizing society, 98 Runü, Beardsley, 148 Ruopp, Phillips, 224, 227, 229, 233 R ussia, 2, 7, 35-36, 44, 48, 52-53, 55, 68, 96, 111, 114, 122, 125, 144, 147, 149-50, 155, 171, 178, 189-96, 198, 204, 213-14, 228, 238, 253 Rwanda, 262 S St. John’s College, ix, 4, 217 S t Kitts and N evis, 253 Saint-Pierre, l’abbé de, 3 ,2 8 ,2 9 Salter, Arthur, 86 Sanctions, 3 7 ,4 1 ,4 7 . See also Enforcement Sandburg, Cari, 230 San Francisco conference, 6 2 ,9 7 ,9 9 , 105, 118-21, 123, 145, 146, 155, 203, 237 Saturday Review o f Literature, 142, 229 Sauer, Paul, 1 5 9 ,1 7 1 ,1 7 3 ,2 2 1 ,2 2 9 Schm idt Adolph, 271 Schneid», Eleanor, 226 Schopenhauer, Arthur, 1 Schuman, Frederick Law, 23 Schuman, Robert, 56 Schwartzberg, Joseph, 14,254 Schwarzenberger, Georg, 76 Schwebel, Stephen M. 20 n Schwimmer, Rosika, 5, 67, 159-61, 164, 171, 219, 270 Science, 26, 1 2 9 ,138,154,191 Scotland, 165 Searchlight on Peace Plans, 107

Searls, Fred, 183 Secrecy, 96-97, 114, 133, 134, 218: no secret o f atom ic bom b, 128, 131, 132, 144,148, 157, 178, 180, 188,195 Security: international, xi, 18, 43, 44, 100, 101, 102, 120, 138, 147,179, 186, 201, 213, 237; n atio n at 18, 112, 1 29,150,153, 165,1 7 8 ,1 8 5 , 191, 193, 196, 236, 243. See also Peace Seeking World Order, 37 Seeley, J. R., 33 Selective Service A c t 110, 116, 150, 217 Self-determination, 43 Self-governm ent (goal o f enlighten­ ment), 32, 36,4 5 Senate (advice and consent), 98, 106, 122,181, 244 Senegal, 265 n Separation o f powers, 30 Serbia, 44 Settlem ent o f disputes, 240, 245. See also Disputes; United Nations Shakhnazarov, Georgi, 19 Shanghai, 61 Shape o f Things to Come, 49 Shapley, Harlow, 135,173 n Shawcross, Hartley, 206,208 Sheppard, H.R.L., 74 Sherwood, Robert E., 54,6 6 Shlaim, Avi, 83 Shotw ell, Jam es T ., 96, 101, 103, 118,184 n, 271 Simpson, John A., 130, 134 Singapore, 6 8 ,9 6 ,2 6 3 Single European A ct 5 Skewes-Cox, B ennet 272,276 Smith, Alice K., 129 n Smuts, Jan Christiaan, 39 Smyth, Henry DeW olf, 148,195 Sobolev, A. A., 198 Social contract 9 ,1 5 ,2 9

Inctox to Volum» 1

Socialism , 34, S3, 163, 164, 170, 2 3 8-39,241-42 Sohn, Louis B., x, 3, 8, 13, 16, 23, 24, 75, 147, 152, 248, 271, 275 Solidarity, 4 4,248 Sooderbund W ar, 12 Soong, T. V., 119 Soul-force, vi South Africa, 7 ,1 3 , 5 1 ,6 8 ,1 6 8 ,2 5 4 Sovereignty, 10, 40, 106, 113, 138, 141, 148, 176, 190, 193, 195, 237: delegations of, 11-12, 106, 119, 120, 158, 183, 184; disolu­ tion o f external, 16, 103, 190; di­ visions of, 7, 106; equality, 48, 103, 105-07, 114, 204, 247; no longer absolute, 17, 51, 138, 143, 154; not lim ited by League o f Na­ tions, 49; nor by U.N., 231; o f the people, 2, 9, 16, 106, 126, 160, 168, 188, 220; strengthened by union, 16, 29, 84, 151, 168; w il­ lingness to lim it, 119-20, 165-66, 174, 187, 190, 196, 200, 204, 213 Soviet U nion, 13, 52, 97, 104, 105, 119, 144, 164, 167, 174, 177-79, 188, 190-95, 204, 213, 222, 236, 247: opposition to world govern­ m ent, 243-44. See also Russia; U nion o f Soviet Socialist Repub­ lics Spaak, Paul-H enri, 56 Spain, 2, 7, 191, 200, 244, 254, 259 Sphere o f influence. See Power polit­ ics Spinelli, Altiero, 5, 76 Sport, 26 Spykman, Nicholas, 23 Stalin, Joseph, 36, 104, 106-07, 169, 191, 196, 238 Stalingrad, 6 4 ,9 6 Star Trek, 10 Stassen, Harold, 98, 118, 120, 173 n, 229


State Department (U.S.), 95-104,144, 172, 179,185, 188, 193,197, 237, 240,247 Stead, W. T., 33-34 Stein, Peter, 19 n Stella, Tiziana, 33,276 Stettinius, Edw ard R. Jr., 112, 116, 217 Stimson, Henry, 105, 110, 111, 129, 150, 271 Stoddard, W illiam, 63 Stone, Harlan Fisk, 116 Stout, Rex, 66 Stowe, Leland, 66 Straus, Ira, 33,276 Streit, Clarence K., 3, 8, 9, 13, 14, 16, 49-63, 72, 77, 84, 9 7 -9 9 ,1 0 7 , 118, 145, 147-50, 161, 164, 225, 247, 271 Student Federalists, 4, 9, 55, 60-63, 108, 146, 175, 201, 217, 223-26, 229-31 Students for Federal W orld Govern­ m ent, 72, 170-76, 216, 221-24, 226-29. See also W orld Republic Study o f Future Worlds, 25 Subsidiarity, 25 Sudentenland, 76 Sully, le duc de, 3 ,2 8 Sweden, 51,242,259 Swing, Raymond Gram, 65,143, 173 n, 216, 225, 233 Switzerland, 2 ,7 ,1 2 , 5 1 ,2 5 3 ,2 5 9 Swope, H a b ert B., 182,184 Syria, 191 System ic approaches, 22, 114. S ee also U.N. reform Szilard, Leo, 3, 128, 129, 135, 137, 272 T Taft, W illiam Howard, 37 Tanzania, 265 n Taylor, Edmund, vi



Taylor, Glen, 6 , 1SS, 174,236 Taylor, Myron, 96 Tchou, M. Thomas, 225 Teller, Edward, 128 Temperance, 58 Terrorism, 26 Thatcher, Paul, 164 Theological problem o f modem war, 126 Thomas, Norman, 173-74 Thompson, W. Scott, 22 n Thoreau, Henry David, 35 Tobey, Charles W ., 157,237 T op-level approach, 229. See also Popular movement Toynbee, A rnold, 4, 14, 27, 75, 76, 84 Transition to work! federation, 3 ,1 4 15, 101. 112, 139, 181, 189, 195, 227, 229 Transnationalism, 25, 34 Treaties, 4 0 ,4 8 ,4 9 : aim s control 70; based on voluntary compliance, 30, 183; restrain exercise o f sovereign­ ty, 112; term inate only one war, 32 Trischka, John, 135 Truman, Harry S, 6 ,1 0 , 5 6 ,1 2 5 ,1 3 7 , 141, 143, 173 n, 179, 181, 186, 196, 203, 215, 235-36, 243, 245 Trum an doctrine, 235-45, 247. S ee also Containment policy Trusteeship, 153 Turkey (and D ardanelles), 44, 190, 2 3 5-37,240 Tyson, J., 26 n

Union o f Britain and France (16 June 1940), 58 n, 73-93, 168, 169, 247 Union of European Federalists, 126, 274 Union: based on law, 30; growing by continuous contacts in new U .N ., 155; o f peoples, 1, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 25, 27, 42, 50, 51, 56, 84, 87, 133, 216, 248. See also Worid fed­ eration Union o f Soviet Socialist R epublics

(U.S.S.R.), 7, 13, 36, 105, 206,

212, 253, 254: w orld union o f soviet socialist republics, 34. S ee also Soviet Union Unitary state, 8, 10, 22, 30, 36,232 United Arab Emirates, 253 United Arab Republic, 7,254 United Kingdom. See G reat Britain U nited N ations, 13, 25, 31, 43, 82, 132, 138, 142, 164, 170, 184,189, 192, 199, 200, 203, 225, 231-32, 235-36, 244: being abandoned like the League, 209, 213; choice be­ tween U.N.O. or chaos, 152; not a guarantor o f security, 205, 207, 213, 235-36; not a worid govern­ m ent, 2, 223, 226; organization, xii, 1, 3, 6, 65, 105-07, 138, 145, 152,179, 211, 215,248; reform ers aim to scrap, 153,155, 237; W orld W ar n alliance, 1, 8, 95-96, 105, 179, 243, 248 United N ations C h arta, xi, 7, 10, 39, 41, 46, 60, 75, 96, 99, 105-06, 114-16, 119, 121, 141, 143, 146, U 172, 208, 211, 237, 265: illusion, Uganda, 265 n 143; inadequate, 149, 174, 237, 248; needs 90% redrafting, 149, Unanimity, 30, 40, 97, 102, 115, 148, 165, 192, 193, 208, 210, 211. See 153, 216; ratified by U.S. w ithout also Veto reservations, 248; strict construc­ tion, 193 Union Now, 50-51, 53-56, 72, 76, 8 2 ,8 4 U nited N ations reform , ix, xii, 5, 8, Union Now with Britain, 58,7 6 11, 15-16, 75, 104, 109, 116-17,

Index to Volume 1

126, 141-58, 159, 183, 184, 195, 199-214, 215, 225, 227, 230-32, 245 United Nations System : M eeting the World Constitutional Crisis, 17 United Nations World, 240-41,244 U nited States o f America, 13,20, 3 3 34, 69, 97, 105, 119, 144, 174, 178, 188, 190, 204, 206, 212, 222, 235-36, 241, 247-48: endan­ gered by League's use o f force, 45; in A tlantic union, 73; m odel for w orld federation, 1, 2, 7, 10, 15, 16, 22, 29-31, 44, 50, 113, 168, 228,263-64; proposed to surrender ultim ate w eapon, 177, 195, 197, 213, 247; uncertain response to League sanctions against Italy, 48 United States o f Europe, 35,1 6 7 ,2 3 0 United States o f the W orld, 35,230 U nited W orld Federalists, 2, 4, 5, 8, 15, 16, 38, 54, 55, 56, 59, 60, 97, 109, 121, 126, 131. 143, 154, 171, 184, 213-34, 245, 247, 272: political corporation, 224; political lobby, 224 Unity and diversity, 2, 8,101, 114 U niversalists, 13, 55, 104, 138, 145, 146 Universal Postal Union, 37,101 Urey, Harold, 128,135,137,173 n Urquhart, Brian, 18 n Usbom e, Henry, 5, 15, 76, 79, 126, 156, 159, 162-70, 220, 276 U .S.S.R. See Union of Soviet Social­ ist Republics U .S. State D epartm ent. S ee State Department U topians, 11, 15, 50, 80, 101, 152, 166V


236, 244, 272 Van Doren, Carl, 5 9 ,1 4 3 ,1 5 7 ,2 0 9 n Van Doren, Mark, 5 9 ,1 4 3 ,2 2 9 ,2 3 0 V ansittait, Robert, 8 4 ,8 6 Vassar College, 173 Venezuela, 7 ,1 2 0 ,2 5 3 ,2 6 1 Versailles treaty: defied by H itler, 49; m istakes o f W ilson, 95; rectifica­ tion, 40, 48 Veterans, 4, 1 2 0 ,1 2 1 ,1 4 3 ,1 4 6 , 14850, 159, 170-72, 179, 184, 219, 223, 226, 229. See also M eyer, Boité; W hitehouse; McCoy; Sauer Veto, xi, 1 1 ,1 4 ,4 0 ,9 7 , 9 8 ,1 0 0 ,1 0 2 , 115, 119-20, 122, 138, 148, 181, 186-87, 189-98, 200, 202, 204, 207-09, 211, 214, 217, 219, 237, 244, 248: pow er not to do any­ thing, 205 Vichy France, 89-90 Vietnam W ar, ix, 2 2 ,5 6 Vishinsky, Andrei, 191,204 Vision, 27, 33, 42, 47, 83, 107, 152, 234 Voorhis, Jerry, 161,200 Voting pow er, 136, 148, 202, 205, 224, 248; voting on the m erits, 189-90. See also Veto

W Wadlow, René, 276 Wagar, W. W arren, xv W ales, 165 Walker, Barbara, 276 W allace, Henry, 2, 6, 126, 155, 19798, 215, 235 W allensteen, Peter, 23 W alters, Francis P., 39 n W ar. abolition, 1, 9, 11, 12, 29, 30, 38, 41, 42, 51, 65, 120, 144, 168, 179-80, 228; culm ination o f arms V race, 200; enforcement by a league, Values, 13,21 45 ,1 9 6 ,2 1 0 ; instrum ent o f nation­ Vandenberg, Arthur S., 137,155,228, al policy, 42, 236, 243; likely to



be precipitated by partial union without Russia, SS. See also Peace W arburg, James P., 6 6 ,2 7 2 W ar dim es, 20 W ashington, 1 5 2 ,191,232 W ashington, George, 4 4 ,4 6 ,2 4 4 Washington Post, 151 W aterlow, Charlotte, 276 W eapons o f m ass destruction, 185, 200, 203, 208, 210, 216. See also N uclear w eapons; C onventional weapons W ebster, Lucy Law, 276 W eighted voting, 13-14, 100, 115, 189, 200, 205. See also Represen­ tation; Veto W eik, M ary H., 272 W eisskoph, V ictor F., 131 W elles, Orson, 221 W elles, Sumner, 6 6 ,9 5 ,9 7 ,1 0 1 ,1 0 3 , 116,144-45, 173 n W ells, H erbert George, 8, 49-50, 99, 272 W estern union, 148, 164, 169. See also N orth A tlantic treaty; Euro­ pean Union W est Indies Federation, 253,254 W eygand, Maxime, 85 W heare, Kenneth, 7 6 ,8 0 W heel«, Joe, 61,229 W heelwright, Robert, 229 W hite, E. B., 3, 105, 117-18, 123, 209 n, 233 W hite, Harry Dexter, 235,248 W hite, W illiam Allen, 5 4 ,6 1 ,6 5 W hitehouse, Rem fer Lee (“Jack"), 4, 159, 171, 173-75, 216, 221, 223, 227, 229, 231, 275 W hitman, W alt, 50 W ien«, Norbert, 218 W illiam s, Stillm an P., 276 W illkie, W endell, 2,1 1 8 W ill o f the people, 98. See also Polit­ ical will; Popular sovereignty

W ilson, Harold, 80 W ilson, Horace, 83 W ilson, James, 116 W ilson, W oodrow, 3, 10, 24, 36-40, 42-44, 46-47. 74, 95, 106, 182, 248 W ilsonianism, 3 6 -3 7 ,4 2 -4 4 ,1 7 7 W inant, John C., 156 W indegg«, Fritz R. von, 157-58,220, 225,229 W ingate, Monica, 274 W isdom, 26, 32,104 W ithering away o f the state, 35 W ittn«, Lawrence, x, 275 W offord, H arris, 4, 9, 15, 55, 60-63, 108,118, 226, 229, 231-33, 275 W oito, Robert, 273 Women’s suffrage, 58,226 W ood, Gordon S., 32 n W ooley, W esley T., xvi, 2 3,276 Wooton, Barbara, 7 6 ,7 8 ,8 0 W orcester State College, x W orld assem bly, 98. 168-69, 200, 205. See also W orld legislature W orld Association o f W orld Federal­ ists, ix W orld Bank, 14,242 W orld citizens, 10.14. 22, 26, 33, 75, 160, 188, 229, 230, 248, 272 W orld civilizations, 1 4 ,1 6 ,4 2 ,1 3 7 W orld communist state, 36 W orld com m unity, 9, 21, 31, 104, 137,180 W orld constitutional convention, 15, 116-17, 144, 145-56, 160-61, 169, 170, 228. See also Peoples* convention W orld Council o f Churches, 63 W orld court, 102, 113,117, 183,186,

201 World democracy. See Democracy W orld empire, 8 ,1 4 2 ,1 4 4 W orld equity tribunal, 75,113 n W orld federal government, 3 ,6 -9 , 15,

Index to Volum » 1

26, 27, 34, 42, 47, 48, 97, 123, 126, 146, 151, 164, 176, 177, 188, 226, 227, 231, 243: neces­ sary, 9, 44, 143, 150, 152, 166, 205, 214, 228; possible, 9; prema­ ture, 148; untried, 228. See also Worid federation W orld federalism . See W orid federal government; World federation W orid Federalist Association, xi W orid federalists (in general), xii, 3, 47, 82, 107-09, 118-19, 215, 233, 240-41, 247-48: activists out o f touch w ith d ay -to -d ay struggle, 241 W orld Federalists (organized), 4, 54, 56-60, 70, 107, 146, 154, 158, 171, 175, 201, 217, 220, 224, 225, 229-30, 232. See also United W orid Federalists W orld Federalists o f Canada, 272 W orld Federalist Youth, 274 W orld federation, 17, 22-25, 39, 49, 80, 81, 91, 96, 106, 107, 120-21, 141-42, 148, 164-65, 170-71, 174, 181, 182, 184, 186, 188, 189: dem ocratic, xii, 1, 6, 8, 10, 13, 43, 4 9 -7 2 , 100, 145, 150, 161, 215; depends on em otional acceptance by 95% o f people, 185; goal of atom ic scientists, 3, 12728, 133, 184; lim ited, 112, 144, 200, 213, 218, 231, 2 3 7 -3 8 ; necessary to abolish war, 143,150, 152, 160-61, 166, 181, 184, 216, 228, 231; universal, 1, 2, 5, 33, 36, 58, 97, 145, 150, 164, 215; w ill preserve national states, 8; would treat all wars as civil wars, 185. See also M inimalism; M axi­ m alism ; U .N . reform ; Peoples' convention; W orld federal govern­ ment World Federation, 23


World Federation Plan, 68 W orld governance. See Global gover­ nance W orid government: unitary, 8 ,2 2 . See also W orld federal governm ent; Worid federation World Government News, 3 ,5 9 ,2 2 4 W orld history, ix, xiii, xvi, 10, 16, 2 7 ,4 2 ,4 7 . See also Opportunity W orld law, xiii, 10, 24, 26, 43, 72, 103, 167-69, 196, 205, 225, 236 W orld legislature, 98. 168-69, 189, 201, 214, 218 W orld M ovement for W orld Federal Government, 5, 5 9 ,1 2 6 ,1 5 4 ,1 6 3 , 171, 219-20, 273, 274 W orld order, 16, 17, 21, 22, 25, 112, 114, 138, 150 W orid peace, xiii, 15, 17, 21. 22, 26. See also Peace World Peace through W orld Law, 24, 75, 98, 113 n W orld policeman, 235. See also Four Policemen W orld politics, 17, 21, 23. See also Policy; Popular movement; Power politics W orld republic, 9 ,1 0 ,1 4 3 ,2 2 7 W orld Republic (formerly Students for Federal W orld G overnm ent), 4, 159, 170, 222, 227-28, 233, 273 W orld state, 17, 18, 21, 22, 42, 138, 164, 165,189. See also W orid fed­ eration W orid Student Federalists, 62,171 W orid taxes, 14,113 Worid Trade Organization, 8 W orld W ar I, 34, 35, 36, 43, 44, 110, 160 W orid W ar n , 1 ,2 , 6 ,1 6 , 26, 3 4 ,4 0 , 42, 47, 49, 50, 59, 70, 73, 76, 77, 125,138, 141, 162, 179, 242, 248: the “unnecessary war” (Churchill), 61; war for democracy, 179



W orld W ar n i, 111, 142, 170, 177, 216, 228, 244, 245 W right, Quincy, 184,273 W ynner, Edith, x, 5 ,7 0 -7 1 ,1 0 7 ,1 3 0 , 131 n, 159-60, 164, 219, 220, 225,275 Y Yugoslavia, 7,2 2 2 , 238, 253,254 Yukawa, Hidelri, 5 Z Zaire, 5 ,2 6 2 Zambia, 265 n Zhdanov, A. A., 243-44 Ziff, W illiam B., 147 Zimbabwe, 265 n Zimmern, Alfred, 77

Introduction to Volum e 2 The mechanical part of it [world government] is not so very diffi­ cu lt The real difficulty is how to tackle the psychological and to some extent economic barriers that come in our way. —Jawaharlal Nehru to Edward Clark, 6 April 1948

T h is volum e continues the history o f the practical, political efforts to estab­ lish a constitutionally limited, democratically representative, world federal gov­ ernm ent in order to effectively abolish war. Readers are referred to the introduc­ tion in volume I for a fuller treatment o f the ideas, individuals, and persistent is­ sues in the project o f w orld federation. Here, we need only comment on the changed situation after announcement of the Truman Doctrine and establishm ent o f the Com infonn in 1947. The Cold W ar arrived. Hence, advocates o f world federal government as the long-term solution to the problem o f modem war, conducted with nuclear weapons, were struggling to preserve the am ity o f the A llies in W orld W ar n and to reverse the policies o f containm ent in the W est and strategic defense in the East, which to many ob­ servers looked like preparations for a Third W orld W ar. Bernard Baruch and W alter Lippmann share honors for coining the term “Cold W ar,” when open hostilities on the model of the previous war did not m aterialize.1 In such an at­ m osphere, a federal union o f governments and peoples for the rational enactment o f law reaching to differing national populations was alm ost inconceivable. Yet international realities had very nearly ended the prospect of general nuclear war, if they had not advanced so far as to perm it a more perfect union o f the govern­ m ents o f the world. In such a hostile atmosphere, all world federalists could do was to quietly af­ firm , as did G renville Clark and United W orld Federalists, “There is no peace w ithout justice, no justice without law, no law without governm ent” In the years particularly from 1947 to 1951, frustrated atomic scientists after defeat o f the Baruch plan, baffled intellectuals at the University of Chicago, Eu­ ropeans split between the ambitions of the Crusade for W orld Government and the fragile beginnings of European Union, and organized W orld Federalists mo­ 1Bernard M. Baruch, The Public Years (New York, 1960), 388; W alter Lippmann, The Cold War: A Study in U.S. Foreign Policy (New York: Harper, 1947).



bilizing the public behind state and U.S. congressional resolutions to at least de­ clare world federal government the long-term policy of the United States—-all en­ gaged in principled dissent from the reversion to massive rearmament, universal m ilitary service, and defensive alliances that policy m akers on both sides, schooled in war, treated as alone realistic and prudent The conventional wisdom in the W est drew its lessons from Munich, die suppression o f die London Poles, the Chinese Revolution, and the Czech coup—in the East from the slackness o f de-Nazification in W est Germany, the threat o f atomic bombs, and the ringing of the communist world with armed capitalist allies. Lost were the lessons of the alliance systems that led to W orld W ar L the failure of the League o f Nations, and the presum ption o f “great power unanimity" in the new United N ations. Preparedness was the order of the day. Si vis pacem, para bellum. If you want peace, prepare for war. Nevertheless, there was notable progress o f the ideal of world federation, now usually forgotten in national history. The m aximalists at Robert M. Hutchins’ University of Chicago published a still inspiring plan capable o f achieving both peace and justice—The Preliminary D raft o f a World Constitution (1948). The m inim alists, more realistic about the practical transition, began their rounds o f drafting and public consultation that began with G renville Clark’s A Plan fo r Peace (1950) and ended with Clark and Louis B. Sohn’s World Peace through World Law (1958). Probably the climax of the political efforts was passage o f world federalist resolutions in some 22 American states and introduction o f 16 resolutions in the U.S. Congress, which led to instructive bearings in the House o f Representatives in 1948 and 1949 and in the Senate in 1950. Federalists were still not numerous enough in the public to pass the bills in Congress, but such legislative successes—threatening to elevate world federalism from a principled ideal to a political reality—provoked the Daughters of the American Revolution and the Veterans o f Foreign Wars by 1949 to organize in desperate opposition to world federalism. The ideal had emerged onto the plane o f politics.

14 Albert Einstein on World Government The only way to think of human destiny today is in political terms. —Albert Einstein, Common Cause, 2 (July 1948): 45 Our defense is not in armaments, nor in science, nor in going un­ derground. Our defense is in law and orda1. —Albert Einstein, 1948, Ralph P. Lapp, “The Einstein Letter That Started It All,” New York Times Magazine, 2 August 1964

. Einstein's Sdence A f te r Hiroshima, Albert Einstein was filled with a deep sense o f responsibili­ ty, since it was his theory of the equivalence of m atter and energy that had made the atom ic bomb possible. He is reported to have reacted to die news of the de­ struction o f the Japanese city with the sad sigh, “Oh, weh!” (Alas!) A long life devoted to peace had gone into the making of that sigh. Einstein had b e at an ad­ vocate o f world government as early as October 1914, when, in opposition to a German apologetic for the Great W ar extolling German Kultur, he signed a man­ ifesto urging that the trends of technology and communications toward a “uni­ versal, w orld-w ide civilization" be observed in a peace treaty establishing a “League o f Europeans.” Throughout W orld W ar I, Einstein used his position at the new Berlin Institute o f Physics (he published the general theory of relativity in 1915) to try to influence his colleagues in preserving their internationalist tra­ ditions.1 But to no avail. A fter the war, Einstein supported W ilson's ideas for w orld organization, looking upon America as the “m ost advanced” nation in respect o f international­ ism . This opinion did not change even after U.S. Senate rejection o f the League. D uring the 1920s and shortly thereafter, when it was apparent that no interna­ tional organization would be established strong enough to restrain the nation­ states from war in case o f another series of accidents like those preceding the W orld W ar, Einstein became a prominent advocate of mass popular rejection of m ilitary service. “The people themselves, " be wrote, “must take the initiative to see to it that they w ill never again be led to slaughter. To expect protection 1Otto Nathan and Heinz Norden, eds., Einstein on Peace (New York: Schocken, 1960), 5 -6 , 11. 308.



from their governments is folly.1

Onstaki and Fraud on War In 1932, Einstein and Sigmund B eud exchanged open letters—still not wide­ ly known—on the “problem o f peace.” Einstein explained his “simple" solution o f setting up, “by international consent," a “legislative and judicial body to settle every conflict arising between nations." He acknowledged that such a step would require the “unconditional surrender by every nation, in a certain measure, of its liberty of action—its sovereignty.” H ie problem seemed to be that the ruling class “has the schools and press, usually the Church as well, under its thumb” and can whip up the natural “lust for hatred and destruction” in the docile popu­ lace into a “collective psychosis” to protect the rulers’ power.1 Freud responded somewhat in tire spirit o f Hobbes. Conflicts of interest are resolved “in principle” by recourse to violence, he admitted. “Right” (law ) was really the might of the weaker united in community against the stronger. W ith­ in the state there rem ains a struggle between the ruling class, which seeks to set itself “above the law ’s restrictions,” and the ruled, who seek to “extend their rights” and establish “equal rights for all.” Between states, conflicts have histor­ ically been settled by “ordeal of war,” yet wars have brought larger and larger states into being. Freud saw no hope that “idealistic attitudes” like those o f G reek superiority to barbarians or Christian solidarity or League o f N ations pledges would produce a necessary central power to maintain world peace. He went into a long explication of the erotic and aggressive, creative and destructive instincts and concluded, characteristically for Freud, that “dread of the form that future wars w ill ta k e ... may serve to put an end to war,” for modem indiscrimi­ nate total war can no longer satisfy the aggressive instincts.* 4*

Sound todflsm In 1933, shortly after Hitler’s accession to power, Einstein was obliged to re­ sign from die Prussian Academy o f Sciences, which was demanding that he re­ tract his protests against the acts disabling the Jews. As in 1914, Einstein was embittered by the “lade o f courage on the part o f the educated classes in Germa­ ny.” He left Germany and very soon repudiated his m ilitant pacifism . He de­ clared that if he were a Belgian be would not refuse military service, for Germany was preparing a “war o f revenge.” There was no alternative for other countries but “m ilitary defense.” Pacifism, which made sense under conditions of interna­ tional anarchy where there was danger only of accidental war, was an invitation to enslavem ent where an aggressor was deliberately planning an attack. Such apostasy im m ediately brought forth sharp criticism from consistent pacifists, notably French hum anist Romain Rolland, but Einstein throughout the 1930s made it d e a r that national military defense measures were necessary only because there was no “international police force subject to the authority o f a supranadon* Ibid., 44, 95-96. ’ Ibid., 188-99. 4 Ibid., 191-202.

Aburt Boston on World Government


albody.” Einstein summed up his views starkly in 1941 in response to a lad from M issouri facing prison because o f his refusal to bear aims. “Please write m e,” the conscientious objector wrote, “and let me know that I have one friend in the world!” Einstein replied:3 There ere two kinds of pacifism: sound and unsound. Sound pacifism tries to prevent wars through a world order based on power, not through a purely pas­ sive attitude toward international problems. Unsound, irresponsible pacifism contributed in large measure to the defeat of France as well as to the difficult situation in which England finds herself today. I urge you to do your share, lest this country make the same mistake!

Ekuton'i Life* *the USA Einstein came to die United States in O ctober 1933, saying, “As long as I have any choice in the matım, I shall live only in a country where civil liberty, tolerance and equality of all citizens before the law prevail.” He was given a prestigious position where he could continue his physical researches at the new Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton (he published his last version o f a uni­ fied field theory in 19S0). The New Jersey legislature passed a particular resolu­ tion welcoming him to the state. Einstein lived quietly with his wife on M ercer Street, where universal recognition o f his famous head o f white hair made him alm ost a prisoner. He missed the company of outstanding scientists and friends, such as Max Plank, who rem ained behind in Berlin. His eyes at this time ac­ quired their sad, faraway, and forlorn look. His compassion for others, his oppo­ sition to war, his painful advocacy o f m ilitary defense measures against the Ger­ man nation, his gradually more emphatic advocacy of world government as the ultim ate solution to the problem o f war—all sprang, in the view o f a biogra­ pher, from his deep sense of how far human affairs were from conformity to the “sublime laws of the universe.”*

Boston's Leadership for World Government In September 1945, he approved the daring project o f Robert M. Hutchins, who was assem bling die Committee to Frame a W orld Constitution.7 He en­ dorsed Emery Reves’ Anatomy o f Peace and recommended it to the Los Alamos atom ic scientists, whose policy statem ent o f November openly set forth world government as the goal after international control o f atomic energy. Einstein co­ signed, with Justice Owen J. Roberts, Senator J. W illiam Fulbright, M ortim er J. Adler, American Veterans Committee founder Charles Boité, Cord Meyer, and M ark and Cari Van Doren, a letter to the New York Times on 10 October 1945:*

5 Ibid.. * Ibid., ’ Ibid., a Ibid.,

219, 229-30, 232-33, 242, 319. 211, 209, xii, ix. 337. 325-31, 339, 34(M 1.



The first atomic bomb destroyed more than (be city of Hiroshima. It also ex­ ploded our inherited, outdated political ideas.... The [U.N.] Charter is a tragic illusion unless we are ready to take the further steps necessary to organize peace.... The San Francisco Charter, by maintaining the absolute sovereign­ ties of the rival nation-states, thus preventing the creation of superior law in world relations, resembles the Acts of Confederation of the thirteen original American republics. We know that this confederation did not work. No league system ever attempted in human history could prevent conflict between its members. We must aim at a Federal Constitution of the world, a working world-wide legal order, if we hope to prevent an atomic war.

For the next five years, Einstein staked his international reputation on repeat­ ed advocacy of world federal government to avoid another general war. He was not lacking in a certain sense of international reality, proposing, for instance, in the November 1945 issue o f the Atlantic M onthly that die three remaining great powers—the U nited States, the Soviet Union, and G reat Britain—initiate the union, generously suggesting that the government of the U.S.S.R. prepare the first draft o f a world constitution.' Einstein was the only W estern advocate o f world government to receive a considerate reply from Soviet scientists and hence indirectly their governm ent He sought a Soviet contribution to the Federation o f American Scientists’ volume One World or None in early 1946,* 101and in late 1947 a fair reply came that at least understood world federation as not an imperi­ alist plot from the U.S. government but as an independent proposal for the union of peoples to securely establish peace. The answer was still negative, however, the conditions not being ready." Emergency Comrrtft— of tho Atomic Sdertlsts Sensing the approach of war, in May 1946 Einstein went beyond expressions o f opinion and took up active, personal leadership as chairman o f the Emergency Committee of the Atomic Scientists.12* The Emergency committee was estab­ lished to raise funds and help set policy for the large atom ic scientists’ move­ ment. A hasty telegraphed appeal for $200,000 was sent to prospective donors over Einstein’s name on 24 May 1946, using phrases that are still often quot­ ed:“ ’ Albert Einstein as told to Raymond Swing, "Atomic W ar or Peace,” A tlantic Monthly, November 1945, pp. 43-45; Nathan, Einstein on Peace, 347-51. The es­ sentials of the article were reprinted in Reader’s Digest, December 1945, and in an ad of World Federalists, U.S.A., “Here Is One Einstein Theory You Can Understand,” New York Times, 9 December 1945. 10 Nathan, Einstein on Peace, 356-60. 11 Albert Einstein, ‘T o the General Assembly of the United Nations,” United Na­ tions World, October 1947, pp. 13-14; Sergei Vavilov, et al., “About Certain Falla­ cies of Professor Albert Einstein." New Times (Moscow), 26 November 1947. Re­ printed in Bulletin o f the Atomic Scientists, 4 (February 1948): 34, 37-38. “ Nathan, Einstein on Peace. 370-74, 382-83, 379-80, 375-76. ” Ibid., 376.

Abart BnstaIn on WoridGovummant


Our world faces a crisis as yet unperceived by those possessing power to make great decisions for good or evil. The unleashed power of the atom has changed everything save our modes of thinking and we thus drift toward un­ paralleled catastrophe. We scientists who released this immense power have overwhelming responsibility in this world life and death struggle to harness the atom for benefit of mankind and not for humanity's destruction.... We need two hundred thousand dollars at once for nationwide campaign to let the people know that a new type of thinking is essential if mankind is to survive and move toward higher levels.... We ask your help in this fateful moment.

In the period from August to September 1946, while the U.N. AEC was aw aiting its report from the Scientific and Technical Committee and the fate o f the Baruch plan was still on the lap of the gods, Einstein completed formal or­ ganization o f the Emergency committee, which gave about another year’s lease on political life to the atom ic scientists’ m ovem ent Only $85,000 (of the $200,000) came in, and there were delays in lining up the trustees. The com­ m ittee was incorporated, appropriately, on 6 August 1946, the anniversary o f the attack on Hiroshima. The scientists eventually numbered nine: Einstein, Harold C. Urey, Selig H echt Hans Bethe, T. R. Hogness, Leo Szilard, Victor F. W eiss­ kopf, Philip M . M orse, and Linus Pauling.14 The im m ediate plan was to raise a m illion dollars. The committee proposed a cautious policy to do a little bit more o f w hat the scientists’ organizations were already doing, without opening any European offices or associating with Communist party scientists. Much ink was spilt to be sure the new funding or­ ganization would qualify for tax-exem ption. John Simpson o f Chicago offered to split the Federation o f American Scientists (FAS) into “political” and “educa­ tional” groups to qualify for funds. Money m eant very much to all the groups after the war working for a more permanent system of peace. A wave o f excite­ m ent rippled through the atom ic scientists’ m ovem ent.15 But the Emergency com m ittee never raised the $1 m illion, so, in their frustration with the failing effort to establish the international control o f atom ic energy, the more radical scientists around Einstein explored the option of world governm ent

Indaddon among the Atomic Scientists B ut the scientists were sp en t the public wasn’t listening anymore, and the radicals were up against remobilized national leadership. Voices such as Hans Bethe’s o f the Emergency committee began to be raised that repeated statements about the horrors o f atom ic war were only increasing the hysteria o f the public. 14 Urey to Condon et al., 16 August 1946; Hecht to Szilard, 3 September 1946; Condon to Schaffner, 6 September 1946; Robert F. Bacher to Einstein, 18 September 1946. ECAS Papers. 1.1. " Szilard to Schaffner, 17 September, 1946, ECAS Papers, 2.10; Simpson to Schaffner, 4 October 1946, ibid., 1.7; Minutes, 15 November 1946, ibid., 4.14. A request for a grant of $100,000 from the Advertising Council was rejected, as was another for $100,000 from Fyke Fanner to help finance the “Peoples' World Consti­ tutional Convention.”



f e d e r a tio n

They w o e making rational thinking less possible, inspiring a witch hunt for se­ crecy violators in the United States, and raising up an “intransigent attitude against Russia.*"* W. A. Higenbotham o f the FAS admitted that “this fear busi­ ness has perhaps been overdone," since atomic scientists were charged with being “ham actors** panicking the public with predictions that civilization w ill destroy itself. Thus the atom ic scientists themselves were contributing to the fear o f Russia that was making compromise over an international control plan impossi­ ble.* 17 W hen only $200,000 from the $1,000,000 appeal o f January 1947 came in and little m ore was expected, Bethe recommended the committee curtail its activ­ ities. This would mean that the Association of Scientists for Atomic Education (ASAE), which was ju st beginning to organize its public meetings, and the Na­ tional Committee for Atomic Information (NCAI) would close up shop, the Bul­ letin o f the Atom ic Scientists would cease publication, and other atomic scien­ tist organizations would fold. A particularly hard blow for fund-raising came when Harvard’s president James B. Conant addressed the Harvard Club in Hous­ ton, arguing that the time was still not right for civilians to take part in setting policy on atom ic energy.1* Luo Szilard's Ousode M eanwhile, Leo Szilard o f the Emergency committee published a thoughtful article, “Calling for a Crusade,” which proposed a general solution to the current atom ic energy stalem ate—a m assive aid program , adm inistered through the United Nations, to develop an “organized world community” as a transitim i to “world government.” Traditional national foreign policy aimed only “to length­ en the interval between two wars," he argued. Collective security was outmoded in a world where no combination of nations could restrain the remaining two great powers. Szilard thought a “m iracle" was needed. He defined a m iracle, w ith Enrico Ferm i, as “an event w hich has a probability of less than ten

MBethe to Schaffner, 29 April 1947, Emergency Committee of the Atomic Scien­ tists Papers, 4.3; 17 “Higinbotham Answers ‘Ham Actor’ Charges in Atomic Research,” W ashington Evening Star, 19 February 1947. A typical hate letter to the Emergency committee had i t “We are behind the Baruch Plan 100%. There is only one sticker in the adop­ tion o f this plan—Russia Your million or billions like it will not buy the friendship of the gang that is now running the Russian state. The only kind of support that could be obtained from them for international control of Atomic Energy is that which would come after we would demonstrate the Bomb on Moscow.” V. H. Van Maren to EGAS, 29 April 1947, ECAS Papers, 2.1. MUrey to Einstein, IS April 1947, ibid., 2.13; Bethe to Schafner, 29 April 1947, ibid., 1.15; Draft Proposed Joint Plan of NCAI and ASAE for Community Educational Activity, 4 April 1947, ibid., 4.9; H. L. Oram, Memorandum on Fund Raising Cam­ paign, 1 October 1946-30 April 1947, ibid.

Abart BftsMn on Worid Government


percent.”1* Crtsb am ong th a Atomic Scientists In Early 1947 “Tw o worlds,” as Eugene Rabinowitch said in an editorial o f the time, w o e shaping up. The United States and the Soviet Union were m anifestly embarked on an atom ic armament race, drawing scientists back into government employ­ m en t Scientists w o e being forced to choose between the defense o f their coun­ try and their social responsibility to mankind. The Atomic Scientists o f Chica­ go and the Association o f Los Alamos Scientists conducted a poll o f their mem­ bers and found them about equally divided on such questions as whether to stop m aking bom bs (139 Yes to 101 No), to make public the number of atom ic bom bs in the U.S. arsenal (90-133), o r to destroy the stockpile (120-10S). There was predominance only on the question o f whether to give out isotopes for research (235-13)." H arrison Brown analyzed the decline. The atom ic scientists w o e disillu­ sioned about politics. They had gone out like “knights in shining arm or" and com e bade like “Don Quixotes” after tilting at windmills. They were tired, sick o f the word “atomic,” bored with the same old speeches. M ost scientists of the M anhattan project had returned to pure research, where their reputations would be m aintained, and younger scientists could not afford to neglect professional achievem ent for the sake o f politics. Critics such as Harvard’s James Conant w ere taking the glam our out o f dissent But m ost o f all, there was a “lack of im aginative purpose," “no specific program, or for that m atter, specific goal.”21 The Federation of American Scientists (FAS), with about 1,000 active mem­ bers in 18 organizations, still represented the atomic scientists nationally, but it too was infected with frustration and indecision. In early 1947, revelations were made o f a top-secret program of biological warfare, which many regarded as an even greater danger to mankind than atomic weapons, but FAS could not agree on m ore than ordering a study. Long delays were experienced in mounting an oppo­ sition to Operation Paperclip (the W ar Department program to bring former Nazi * Leo Szilard, “Calling for a Crusade,” Bulletin o f the Atomic Scientists, 3 (A prilMay 1947): 102-6, 125. Szilard had been circulating his article, originally entitled ‘T he Need for a Crusade,” since December 1946. ECAS Papers, 2.10. The Bulletin o f the Atom ic Scientists bracketed Szilard’s proposal with one by a professor at the New School for Social Research calling for a Culbertson-like U.N. police force, which Russia’s refusal to join would be taken as prima facie evidence of aggressive intent justifying the use of force against her; and another by Cuthbert Daniel and Arthur M. Squires of Oak Ridge, who advocated unilateral dismantling of U.S. atomic plants and a freeze on atomic development to reduce world tensions, pending agreement on an Acheson-Lilienthal-type control system as a “first step in the evolution of the Unit­ ed Nations toward world government.” * Eugene Rabinowitch, “The Soviet Plan for Atomic Energy Control," Bulletin o f the Atomic Scientists, 3 (August 1947): 201; Higinbotham to Administrative Com­ mittee o f the Federation of American Scientists, 1 April 1947, FAS Papers, 1.8. *' Harrison Brown to Executive Committee of Atomic Scientists of Chicago, n.d., ante 27 May 1947, ECAS Papers, 2.10.


b e p o l it ic o f w o r ld fed er a tio n

scientists and technicians, including W ernber von Braun, to work in the U .S.); eventually only a letter to the President was sent. There was much agitation to little effect over secrecy and security clearance cases in government labs (even graduate students bad to have Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) clearance to do thesis research). The W orld Federation o f Scientific W orkers, based in England, with contacts in Russia, invited FAS to affiliate, but such potential international contact was rejected largely because the British group’s chairman, the distinguished physicist and socialist P.M.S. Blackett, was perceived in the U.S. as tainted with Com­ munism. (He had w ritten a Fabian tract, The Atom and the Charter, in 1946.) The leadership was deeply divided on what to do to get the U.N. AEC talks going again, Hugh C. W olfe arguing that Russia respects strength, and Philip M orri­ son that ceasing to assemble bombs would not reduce our strength but would re­ assure the world of American pacific intent; a motion along M orrison’s lines was voted down. About all FAS could unite on was National Science Founda­ tion legislation and civilian control in the U.S. AEC. Historically, these domes­ tic acts were the atom ic scientists’ sole achievements, since the international control o f atomic energy was a failure.”

World Govammanros a Goal In this crisis o f the atomic scientists in the first half o f 1947, the leaders who wished not to disband found in international events a proof that control of atomic energy could not be pursued in isolation from other foreign policy issues but had to be incorporated into a general international settlement. Higinbotham, for ex­ ample, suggested that scientists should now “join with other groups and citizens to work on foreign policy as a whole.’’ He agreed with Leland Stowe, who argued in his book While Time Remains that, if the United States were going to fight Communism for world leadership, Americans would have to find better weapons than dollars and bullets. They w ill have to find an id ea a Harrison Brown, chairman o f the executive committee of the Atomic Scien­ tists o f Chicago, reminded the scientists of their universalist traditions and rare clarity o f vision in political affairs: “I believe that at heart, more than any single group, we comprehend the desperate necessity for the creation of a brotherhood of man living in a single peaceful world.”14 Brown set down various criteria for a new atomic scientists’ policy. It m ust have reasonable probability o f success, yet offer reasonable safety to the United 32* ” Minutes of the Council Session of the Federation of American Scientists, 1-2 February, IS—16 March, 4 May 1947, FAS Papers, 1.5; FAS to President, n.d., c. March 1947, ibid., 1.6; Association of Oak Ridge Engineers and Scientists Log, 78, 80. 25 September and 2 October 1946, AORES Papers, 8.1; Domestic Legislation, FAS Papers, 10 and 11. 23 Higinbotham to Administrative Committee, n.d., post March 1947, FAS Papers, 1.8; Leland Stowe, While Time Remains (New York: Knopf, 1946), esp. Chaps. 12, 13, and 19. MBrown to Executive Committee, n.d., c. May 1947, ECAS Papers. 2.10.

Abort Einsteinon World Government


States if unsuccessful. It m ust be consistent with the “m oral integrity” o f the scientists. It would surely require great initiative of the people and government o f the United States—more than could be expected from other countries. It could require extensive education at home and abroad. Ib is new policy, with a chance o f producing a general international settlement, was necessarily world govern­ m e n t Brown pointed out that m ost scientists he bad spoken to agreed with w orld governm ent as an ultim ate goal, differing only over approaches and its structure and powers. W orld governm ent which had always been do se to the international control o f atom ic energy in the thinking of leaders o f the atomic scientists’ movement— if their organizations had shied away from it—now received new notice in their discussions and journals.8 But as the scientists seriously considered world gov­ ernm ent as their own goal, som e fell into the sam e fallacies that had been m apped out before by the world government m ovem ent

Attende Union as on Alternative Harold Urey, for instance, in June 1947 abandoned his earlier universal world governm ent position and came out for A tlantic “union now.” W riting in the B ulletin o f the Atom ic Scientists, Urey surveyed the first year o f negotiations over the Baruch plan and conduded that the “experiment” was a “failure.” The U .S. proposals had been “very generous,” yet “no cooperation” had come from the Soviet Union and Poland. The Soviets, he speculated, were afraid that the international inspectors would discover Russia’s m ilitary weaknesses, thus call­ ing her “immense bluff in the international poker game,” expose the prison cam ps o f 14 m illion reported political prisoners, entice the people away from their social and economic revolution, and hence threaten the “Communist dicta­ torship itself.” In the face of Soviet opposition to the American plan, Urey pro­ posed a “federal union o f ... the western democracies.” His argument for the pre­ ponderance o f power in the Union was identical to Clarence Streit’s, as was his blindness to the provocation this would cause Russia. “It m ight [lead to w ar directly, r Urey admitted; “but I maintain that any other alternative which seems a t all possible at present also has an enormous risk of leading to war.”2* If A tlantic Union, then, would not have a greater chance o f preserving the peace, why try it in place o f traditional diplomacy, even the Truman doctrine? U rey was sharply answered by Philip M orrison and Robert R. W ilson. They w ere “not less shocked than disappointed” that Urey, a prom inent advocate o f “one w orld,” had settled for “half a world.” Atlantic Union “simply can’t be m ade to work," they claimed, since it is based on the threat o f war or what Urey called an advantageous “unbalance of power.” Acceptance of a “world divided,” by a partial union or by a policy o f containment as in the Truman doctrine, “has its logical conclusion in war.” They urged that scientists continue to support 11 Harrison Brown, “The World Ooverament Movement in the United States,” Bul­ letin o f the Atomic Scientists, 3 (June 1947): 136. * Harold C. Urey, “An Alternative Course for the Control of Atomic Energy,” Bul­ letin o f the Atomic Scientists, 3 (June 1947): 139-42, 166.



negotiations in the U.N. AEC, preferably on the model o f (veto perm itted) "co­ operative managerial control, like that in the [Acheson-lLilienthal plan.””

Th* Ideal of World Government vs. th* Poky of Containment In the m idst o f this ferment o f ideas, this crisis o f purpose, a conference erf representatives o f FAS, NCAI, ASAE, and several social scientists was held in Lake Geneva, W isconsin, on 18-21 June 1947. The conference issued a re­ sounding statement, reaffirming the atomic scientists’ old doctrine that there was no secret o f the atomic bomb, no defense was possible, and hence international control was necessary. But it went far beyond that. Echoing United W orld Fed­ eralists’ language, the fundamental alternative was said to be world government, "peace based on the rule o f law.” The statement closed with a recognition o f the obligation of the United States—as the wealthiest and least ravaged country to come out o f the war—to lead, beginning with a reconstruction program, unlike the M arshall plan, under the auspices o f the United Nations.” The Emergency committee immediately followed with an endorsement o f the scientists' new statement of purpose. A renewed fund drive, widening the cam­ paign, was begun.1* W orld government, however, as a realistic policy objective for the atomic scientists and hence for the United States was now being offered at a moment when the U.S. had already undertaken a policy o f containment o f So­ viet expansion. A w ar between East and W est seemed to be developing. If the international control o f atomic energy could not be agreed to, how could the two great pow ers agree to the establishm ent o f a common w orld governm ent? Throughout the remaining months of 1947, the rank and file o f the scientists’ organizations failed to follow the lead of the Lake Geneva conferees or the Emer­ gency Committee of the Atomic Scientists. M ost o f the scientists were still committed to the American plan for the in­ ternational control o f atomic energy or, failing that, to preparedness. Perhaps the m ost revealing incident o f the decline was Edward Teller’s decision to aban­ don the dream of world government for building the H-bomb. Teller, now at the University o f Chicago, pointed out that originally die scientists had two goals— civilian control domestically and comprehensive international control. The first had been won. Until the second was won, he argued in the aftermath o f the U.N. AEC negotiations, the United States had to maintain its lead in atomic energy de­ velopment in both wartime and peacetime.10 At a meeting of the Atomic Scien­ tists of Chicago in late 1947, he exclaimed with some heat, "[The choice now before scientists is] to work on atomic energy under our present adm inistration [or] to work for a world government which alone can give us freedom and peace.” ” Philip Morrison and Robert R. Wilson, “Half a World ... And None: Partial World Government Criticized,” ibid. (July 1947): 181-82. " “Statement of the Lake Geneva Conference,” Bulletin o f the Atomic Scientists, 3 (August 1947): 217. ” Statement of the Emergency Committee of the Atomic Scientists. 29 June 1947, ECAS Papers, 4.3; Bulletin o f the Atomic Scientists, 3 (August 1947): 216-17. w Minutes of the Executive Committee, 7 October 1947, ASC Papers, 6.13.

Abort Bnatutoon Wcdd Govarrvnenf


Tw o years later in 1949, he would lead the U.S. effort to develop the H-bom b.11

CohapM of the Sctaraists' Movement amid Charges of Dtstoyaky The Em ergency com m ittee made a heroic attem pt to save the dream a t a m eeting in Einstein’s Princeton in November, but nothing could arrest the de­ cline. The conferees could not come to much m ore agreement about world gov­ ernm ent than that the movement to establish it could not succeed in tim e to prevent W orld W ar m but should be supported to avoid W orld W ar IV!11 The AORES W orld Government Committee disappeared, NCAI and ASAE folded, PAS barely survived, and the Bulletin o f the Atom ic Scientists kept going but with­ out the old radicalism. In February 1948, even before official termination o f the U .N . AEC talks, the U.S. AEC announced a new series o f atomic weapons tests a t Eniwetok.” Throughout 1948, those left in the scientists’ organizations were much exer­ cised by issues o f loyalty, scientific freedom, civil liberties, social responsibili­ ty, and guilt. D r. Edward U. Condon, the distinguished director o f the U.S. Bu­ reau o f Standards and former special advisor to the Senate Committee cm Atomic Energy, was the first prom inent scientist to be tagged under the Truman loyalty program . He was investigated by Representative J. Parnell Thomas (R., New Jersey) o f the House Un-American Activities Committee in m id-1947 and again by Senator Bourke B. Hickenlooper (R„ Iowa) in early 1948—both o f whom published accusations without perm itting Condon to appear in his own defense. Condon was apparently guilty o f nothing m ore disloyal than a sentim ent in favor o f international scientific cooperation. A conceited protest by other scien­ tists, especially the Emergency committee, succeeded in getting Condon cleared in 1948, but the damage had been done. The Condon case may be taken as the end o f the depoliticalization rtf the atomic scientists.14 The pages o f the Bulletin in 1948 were again taken up with the debate on the social responsibilities o f scientists. J. Robert O ppenheim «’, apparently him self feeling the sting o f disloyalty innuendoes that would la t« succeed in officially disbarring him from government service, argued for a retreat from politics back to pure science, leaving unanswered the question o f scientists’ participation in renew ed atom ic weapons developm ent Harold C. Urey, on the other hand, recMEdward Teller, “Atomic Scientists Have Two Responsibilities,” Bulletin o f the Atomic Scientists, 3 (December 1947): 355-56. » Summary of Areas of Agreement, n.d., c. 29 November 1947, UWF Papers, 33. » Ibid., 4 (April 1948): 110. w E. U. Condon, "Science and International Cooperation,” ibid., 2 (15 May 1946): 8-11; “Scientists and the Government,” ibid, 4 (April 1948): 97-98; Condon to Hic­ kenlooper, April 1948; Press Release, 3 March 1948, ECAS Papers, 6.3; Conclusion, Bulletin o f the Atomic Scientists, 4 (August 1948): 226. A dinner in Condon’s sup­ port was held in New York on 12 April 1948. The sponsors included a veritable who’s who of the atomic scientists, but Arthur H. Compton, James Conant, J. R obot Oppenheimer, Henry DeWolfe Smyth, and John Von Neumann refused to come, all on the grounds of “political” considerations. Refusal Messages, n.d., c. March 1948, ECAS Papers, 63.



renewed atom ic weapons developm ent Harold C. Urey, on the o tte r hand, rec­ ognized the responsibilities o f scientists for two wars in this century and thought they should still do something to prevent a third. About this time the analogy o f the German scientists who had collaborated with the Nazi regime was painful­ ly brought home to the American atomic scientists. The 1945 Stimson, Szilard, and Chicago reports urging restraint in the use o f atomic bombs were published to rem ind the scientists o f their form » stand.” Finally, by the end o f 1948, Einstein published a letter in the Bulletin stat­ ing—dreadfully from our perspective—that the hopes o f the atom ic scientists were at an end:1* The developments of the last two years have made it plain that the education of mankind toward a clear understanding of the implications of atomic ener­ gy, and full appreciation of the dangers and hopes inherent in new discover­ ies, is a long-range task which cannot be solved on an emergency basis.

Htitcrtcai ftnftodton on the Sdartists' Movumsrtf Eugene Rabinowitch surveyed the history of the scientists’ attitudes in an ed­ itorial in the Bulletin. In 1945, the atomic scientists decided to make the inter­ national control o f atomic energy—not world government —the first plank in their platform because the first was “obvious to a ll,” while the second seemed an “unobtainable ideal.” Yet most scientists recognized that world government was implied. They credited their warning about atomic war for the sense of urgency in the parallel world government m ovem ent By 1947, confused and defeated by the forces o f nationalism , the scientists could not go back to 1945 and seek the more com prehensive solution that the failure o f piecem eal efforts seem ed to prove necessary. They were too late. Rabinowitcb even claimed that the scien­ tists had not expected success—only exposure o f the “obsolete political struc­ ture” of international relations before another failure in w ar.17 D isillusionm ent, fatigue, the attractions of pure research, loyalty slurs, and la d t o f international opportunity—all conspired to wear down the remnants o f the m ovem entM

” J. Robert Oppenheimer, “Physics in the Contemporary World,” Bulletin o f the Atomic Scientists, 4 (March 1948): 65-68, 85-86; “Scientists and Social responsi­ bility,” ibid., 69-75; Philip Morrison, Review of S. A. Goudsmit’s Alsos, ibid., 3 (December 1947): 354; Max von Laue, ibid., 4 (March 1948): 103-4; Stimson Memo, ibid., 4 (August 1948): 240-41; Szilard Memo, ibid., 3 (December 1947): 351-43; Chicago PoU, ibid., 4 (February 1948): 44, 63. MBulletin o f the Atomic Scientists, December 1948; Nathan and Norden, Einstein on Peace, 506. ” Eugene Rabinowitch, “Scientists and World Government” Bulletin o f the Ato­ mic Scientists, 3 (December 1947): 345-46. MMeyer to Brown, 14 December 1948, UWF Papers, 33; Einstein to Meyer, 30 July 1948, ibid.; Mel Freedman to Executive Committee, 8 April 1949, ASC Papers, 6.9; Rabinowitch, Bulletin o f the Atomic Scientists, 4 (April 1948): 105.

Abort Bnstoinon World Govommnnf


W hat were the achievements o f the atomic scientists’ movement? The scien­ tists’ great, original ambition to bring undo* *international control this basic force o f the universe that they had placed into man’s hands was not achieved, and it re­ m ains unachieved to this day. The abolition o f war, w hich atom ic energy seem ed to necessitate, was not accomplished and still remains a task for the fu­ ture. The scientists helped develop the U.S. plan for the international control o f atom ic energy but, when the Russians proved unimpressed, did not advise Amer­ ican negotiators to compromise, nor did they advocate world government. Com­ prom ise a t the time they regarded as a violation of principle; world government, as only an ultim ate solution. Their lasting achievements were perhaps intangible. They did not convince the governm ent or the people that there were no atomic secrets and no possible defense, but they did im plant a doubt in the public m ind that an atom ic war could be “won,” and their warnings about atomic w ar did give impetus to the larger and bolder world government movement.” A history o f the atomic scientists’ movement would not be complete without m entioning the indefatigable North D akota physicist Daniel Q. Posen. Posen w orked on radar at the M assachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) during the war. In Cambridge he became associated with the slightly leftist American As­ sociation o f Scientific W orkers, which may explain why he was shirked by prom inent atom ic scientists. He then became professor o f physics at North Da­ kota State College at Fargo, where be would have been forgotten had he not bu­ sied him self with his speaking. Posen, who was fluent in Russian, was the au­ thor o f M endeleyev: The Story o f a Great Scientist, still the only biography in English o f the creator o f the periodic table. Posen took to heart a remark o f Einstein’s—‘T o the village squares we m ust carry the facts o f atomic energy”—and from October 1946 to October 1948, he crisscrossed North Dakota, M innesota, and several eastern states, giving over 200 vivid, personal speeches about the nature and dangers of atomic energy. N o other scientist did as much to reach ordinary people in such neglected areas o f the country in order to explain to them the implications for war and peace o f the new discoveries.40 W hen asked what was his solution, Posen replied undogmatically by referring to the precedent of the Constitutional convention o f 1787. One of the things be did was to distribute 2,200 copies of the model world constitution published by the Chicago Committee to Frame a W orld Constitution in early 1948. The peo” Domestically, the atomic scientists movement succeeded in establishing the ci­ vilian control of atomic energy (the McMahan Act of 1946) and in passing National Science Foundation legislation. These achievements, however, in significance fell far short of the international control of atomic energy, which was a failure. * Albert Einstein interviewed by Michael Amrine, “The Real Problem Is in the Hearts of Men,” New York Times, 23 June 1946, reprinted in Otto Nathan and Heinz Norden, eds., Einstein on Peace (New Yotk: Schocken Books, 1960), 383-88; Dan­ iel Q. Posen, I Have Been to the Village (Ann Arbor, MI: Edwards Bros., 1948), 2, 68. 131-33, 141-49, passim.



the Chicago Committee to Frame a W orld Constitution in early 1948. The peo­ ple responded warmly, gratefully, if in perplexity. One time an older, intelligentlooking man asked, “W hat should be done?” Later Posen learned he was the edi­ tor o f the local newspaper. Posen replied, “M ore peace talk, not war. Newspapers writing o f hope and peace. Editorials on mutual understanding and peace. The story o f the atom ic age and how we m ust change old power concepts o f domination, and notions o f solutions by force, which w ill not bring solutions in the atomic age." “We can’t write that," the man replied.41

41 ‘T he Strange Case of North Dakota,” Common Cause, 1 (May 1948): 398; New York Star, 1 September 1948; New York Post, 7 September 1948.

15 Robert M. Hutchins: Framing a World Constitution World government is necessary; therefore, it is possible. —O.A. Borgern, Secretary to the Committee, 1948 All that is novel about the Preliminary Draft {of a World Constitution] is the courage and clarity with which it faces historical reality. —Gertrude S. Hooker, Common Cause, 1 (June 1948): 435

The Most Substantial InQ leduol Contribution to World Fodorofam I n July 1947, after a year and a half o f deliberations that began literally the week after the atom ic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the U niversity o f C hicago’s chancellor Robert M. Hutchins, professor of literature G. A. Börgese, and the Com m ittee to Frame a W orld Constitution began publishing their find­ ings, first in the new scholarly journal Common Cause and later in their pub­ lished Documents 1-150 and bodes.' In March 1948, the whole issue o f Com­ mon Cause contained their Preliminary Drctft o f a World Constitution, a work that im m ediately had significant influence on the world government movement and rem ains a political classic o f the m id-tw entieth century.* 1 The Committee to Frame a W orld Constitution constituted the “maximalist” school o f world federal government. Its Preliminary D raft o f a World Constitu­ tion was designed to achieve the end not merely o f international security but o f both peace and justice. Its powers were as large as those o f any national state. Hence, the constitution provided for a novel, strong yet checked and balanced world government, alm ost a unitary world state. N ine electoral regions, coincident with the historic civilizations o f the earth, 1 Common Cause and Documents 1-150 have been republished in a microfiche edition by the author Joseph P. Baratta, ed., The World Federalist Movement: A Collection o f Mainstream Journals (New York: Norman Ross, 1990). 253 fiche + 2 reels + 6 guides. 1 "Preliminary Draft of a World Constitution,” Common Cause, 1 (March 1948); Preliminary D rift o f a. World Constitution (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1947).



were distinguished, where the people everywhere would elect representative elec­ tors. These electors, in turn, were to assemble in federal convention and elect 99 world legislators and a president A broad grant of powers would perm it the world legislature to organize federal armed forces, lim it and control national forces, regulate world commerce, supervise world communications and transpor­ tation, lay w orld taxes, issue world money and control world finance, prepare plans for equitable economic developm ent regulate emigration and immigration, supervise the rectification o f borders and the creation o f new states, and protect human rights. A grand tribunal was provided to settle constitutional issues, disputes be­ tween the world government and the nation-states, disputes between the w orld governm ent and individuals, international disputes, and interpretation o f the w orld law s; and there was to be a supreme court o f appeal. A tribune of the people— “spokesman for the m inorities"—was given the privilege o f the floor before the grand tribunal and supreme court; there were express lim itations on the laws; and the people were protected and enjoined by a daring bill o f rights and duties. A chamber of guardians would provide for defense; a planning agency, for economic developm ent "Peace and justice stand together'* was a principle enshrined in the audacious preamble. Sigrtficancaof the PnÊmktay Drafto f o WoMCanaUuâon W hat are we to think of this astonishing draft world constitution, so a t var­ iance with the United Nations Charter and the “m inim alist" proposals of Gren­ ville Clark and the United W orld Federalists? That such a constitution could be written by knowledgeable (not to say wise) men and women, including a univer­ sity chancellor, two deans o f prominent law schools, a former member of Frank­ lin Roosevelt’s “brain trust,” and leading professors at Chicago, Harvard, Stan­ ford, and Toronto, is a reflection of the more hopeful, politically more imagina­ tive times o f the 1940s, particularly after use of the atomic bomb in 1945. But the constitution and the reasoning behind it remain a repository o f clear world political analysis, o f prescription adequate to the ends of international or­ ganization, indeed, o f wisdom, which someday may provide an invaluable guide to w orld statecraft at a m ore auspicious hour o f our global regeneration. The World Federalist Papers, as the Preliminary Draft and the documents of the Chi­ cago committee were sometimes called, are rather like James M adison’s study o f republican governments in 1786, on the eve o f the U.S. Constitutional conven­ tion, or like Hamilton, M adison, and Jay’s The Federalist Papers in 1787-88, during the struggle over ratification. The objective o f the committee was “to embody the idea o f world govern­ m ent in an exact and organic pattern of W orld Law.” 3 Hutchins, Börgese, and others on the com m ittee tried to avoid m ost of the “American" biases in the world federalist movement. They did not regard atomic fear as a sufficient m otivation for the establishment of a necessary world federal governm ent * Declaration of Purpose and Policy, 24 October 1946 [Doc. 103], Common Cause, 1 (July 1947): 19.

nOOOn M. WivIWd: ItOfiWig Q WOnOvjOnSniUDOn Q jk ik A a A



|İ M İ k İ A f l .

tt/ jk a U

^ M

iu é U l llİM k


Aä #cä W hat the rest o f the world demanded, they judged, was not mere security from atom ic attack, but justice—justice in the sense of reconstniction after the war, protection o f hard-w on economic rights, independence from colonial masters, an end to racism in every form, and assistance for equitable social and economic de­ velopm ent As the wartime alliance between the United States and the Soviet U nion began to break up, the Cold W ar was seen as a fundamental conflict about the nature o f justice, o f the relative importance o f equality or liberty, o f social­ ism or capitalism , on which the “inevitable” world union would be based. The nature of justice in these papers is subjected to some o f the m ost penetrating ex­ am ination of modem times. The committee’s device o f 9 electoral colleges to settle the vexed problem of representation in the world state had the great virtue that it (apparently) avoided undem ocratic schemes o f weighted representation. M any other features o f the constitution were suggestive, such as tire syndical senate for the representation o f unions and business corporations; the institute o f science, education, and culture for bringing intellectuals into a more responsible role for governing of the world; the planning agency; and even the election o f the tribune o f the people from the candidate receiving the second highest vote, since he was to be protector o f the minorities. A real synthesis o f East and W est, “going beyond 1787," was made. A way out from the ideological conflict between totalitarian communism and rugged individualism was found in “regulated economy” and “liberal socialism."4

Pilnolplas, Qrgonisiït AAndwrtsm W hatever one may think of the possibilities for enactm ent o f such a world constitution, it is a clear document showing vividly what is necessary to subject the anarchic nation states to world law. “A constitution, any constitution," wrote G . A. Börgese on the publication of the Preliminary D raft in 1948, “is three things in one. It is a m anifesto or proclam ation o f principles. It is a political organism . It is a juridical mechanism."1 The constitution shows, at least conceptually, that the problem o f war is not insoluble. The draft was conceived as a model for thought and action. Despite charges o f “utopianism ,” committee members were not indifferent to the prob­ lem o f transition. Hutchins argued that any future consideration o f the shape of w orld governm ent would have to take die com m ittee’s draft into a cco u n t* * E rich K ahler, an ém igré German scholar, looked to a popular m ovement o f “citizens o f the world" to force governments to submit to a supranational author4 O. A. Borgese, “Introduction to Constitution 111 (Constitutio Major),” 3 Janu­ ary 1947 [Doc. 112], Common Cause, 4 (July 1931): 640-41; Wofford to Borgese, 21 October 1947, Regenslein Library, Committee to Frame a World Constitution Pa­ pers (hereafter CFWC Papers), 323; Robert M. Hutchins, G. A. Borgese, et al., “Pre­ liminary Draft of a World Constitution,” Common Cause, 1 (March 1948). * “First Comments,” Common Cause, 1 (March 1948): 347. * Robert M. Hutchins, “The State of the University, 1929-1949” (University of Chicago, 21 September 1949), pp. 33-36.



ity. The committee was performing the "ideological preparation” for such a rev­ olution, he argued, analogous to what Locke and M ontesquieu had done for the English and French Revolutions, Rousseau for the French, and Marx and Engels for the Russian.7 M ortimer Adler advised that world government must come in not 500 years butfive, after which world w ar would become inevitable.'

Myth: A Proposal to History Börgese, too, saw the function o f the committee to “gather light” and “to convert it into heat operating on legislative and political action.” He coined the watchword o f the committee: “W orld government is necessary; therefore, it is possible.” To Börgese, what the committee was doing was formulating a pow­ erful myth, not in the sense of nonsense as used by some critics but in the sense o f “prophecy,” a “proposal to history.” Like what he called the myth o f the Law o f Nature, W orld Law would give direction to the modem world and inspire ac­ tion toward its own creation.* A constitution proposed to a political organism not yet in being is a myth, incorporating the faith and hope of its age; [it] mediates between the ideal and the real and calls the mind to action. ... World Government shall come—this is practically the consensus in this generation—whether within five years or fifty, whether without a conflagration or after it. In this per­ spective the Committee's Constitution is meant, no less humbly than confi­ dently, as a proposal to history.

A t the beginning o f their deliberations shortly after Hiroshima in 1945, com­ m ittee members thought of themselves—not entirely jokingly—as “Founding Fathers” o f the W orld Republic. But by the time of publication of their Prelim i­ nary D raft o f a W orld Constitution some three years later in 1948, they were much more cautious, describing themselves not as the “Committee that Fram ed the W orld Constitution” but as contributors of a constitutional design to clarify the problems erf world government and lead to further “study and discussion.”

Prodtcai Us« of th« Prolminary Draft Still, the committee— Borgese especially, the dynamic spirit o f the intellec­ tual group—was deeply concerned to actively use the draft to arrest the drift to­ ward war. He supported Henry Usborne’s call for a peoples’ constitutional con­ vention in 1950, if this could be transformed into an official convention, and he opposed United W orld Federalists’ proposals few U.N. reform, which seemed too ’ Erich Kahler, “The Case for World Government,” 6 January 1947 [Doc. 119], Common Cause, 1 (July 1947): 6-7. ' Mortimer J. Adler, “Five Hundred Yean from Now or Five?’ ibid., 9-10. * [G. A. Borgese,] ‘T o the Reader,” Common Cause, 1 (March 1948): 326-27. Borgese’s watchword, despite his occasional pride of authorship, was rooted in Kant’s practical reason: You can, because you must.

Robert M. Hutchins: fantag o World Constitution


close to the side of American foreign policy in the Cold W ar.' Since the committee was not ready to begin publishing Common Cause un­ til July 1947, immediately after announcement of the M arshall plan, and since the Preliminary D raft o f a World Constitution did not appear until M arch 1948, shortly after the Communist party coup in Czechoslovakia, Hutchins, Börgese, and their colleagues, like the rest o f the world federalist movement, w o e much too late to influence events. T h o r proposal never attracted influential support in governm ent or in the international community—apart from a maximal bill for the establishm ent o f a world republic introduced by Senator Glen Taylor, after he and Henry W allace lost their Progressive party challenge in 1948. So die Chica­ go constitution remains for the ages. T he Preliminary D raft was translated into French, Italian, German, and Ja­ panese and has often been republished—by Hutchins* Center for the Study o f Dem ocratic Institutions, M ortimer Adler’s later books, and m ost recently in the volum e Constitutional Foundations o f World Peace.10 It was reviewed some 10 tim es, once by the young M cGeorge Bundy. “W hat is it that keeps the nations apart today?” Bundy asked. “Is it not precisely their inability to reach any agree­ m ent on the content o f the idea o f justice?”11 Borgese responded in his character­ istically florid way: “But do the Americans think and say that antisocial liberty and race prejudice are just? Do the Russians teach inequality of wealth and war? A re the Indians in favor o f totalitarianism , the Chinese of antisocial liberty?... W hat keeps the nations apart is their variance in the ways of not living up to (justice].”“ Behind the scenes or in powerful dissent within the pages o f Common Cause, com m ittee members were critical o f Cold W ar policies and they proposed funda­ m ental alternatives. Documents 1-150 and Common Cause, which historian George T. Peck called the “W orld Federalist Papers,” 13are certainly the place for serious students o f world federal government to begin. They ate full of light for political philosophers, political scientists, world historians, historians o f the C old W ar, peace researchers, hum anists, international educators, federalists, idealists, and realists. T he only other place to begin would be Grenville Clark and Louis B. Sohn’s W orld Peace through W orld Law, which appeared even later, long after the op­ * McKeon to Borgese, 13 May 1946, CFWC Papers, 18.8; O. A. Borgese, “The Founding Convention: When? How? Where?” Common Cause, 1 (August 1947): 4 1 -4 3 . "A Constitution fo r the World (Santa Barbara, CA: Center for the Study of Demo­ cratic Institutions, 1965), introduction by Elisabeth Mann Borgese; Richard A. Falk, Robert C. Johansen, and Samuel S. Kim, eds, The Constitutional Foundations o f World Peace (New York: SUNY Press, for the World Order Models Project, 1993). MThe Reporter (New York), 22 November 1949. MO. A. Borgese, Foundations o f the World Republic (Chicago: University of Chi­ cago Press, 1953), 250-51. " George T. Peck, “Universal Pattern of Law Is Sought as Basis for Global Com­ munity," New York Herald Tribune, 3 November 1946, Forum, p. X-32.



portunity for action had passed (1958). For their comparable vision to the Chi­ cago com m ittee’s ringing poetry, see the commentary on making the G eneral Assembly elective, especially on an emerging “sense of responsibility for the in­ terests of the whole world,” as in revised Articles 18 and 27. Clark and Sohn’s proposals for U.N. reform , if reform is a m ore realistic approach than a com­ pletely new start, have generated more interest but hardly m ore action. A large literature on U.N. reform never goes so far as Clark and Sohn, much less than as the Chicago committee.

Origin of the Gommifl»» The com m ittee originated in a U niversity o f Chicago radio broadcast one week after Hiroshima in which Chancellor Hutchins boldly argued that a “world state” was the only alternative to eventual atomic destruction. G. A. Börgese and Richard P. McKeon, dean of the Division of the Humanities and editor o f Aris­ totle's works, then wrote to Hutchins, formally proposing that an “Institute for W orld Government,” parallel to the university's Institute for Nuclear Physics (under whose M anhattan Project predecessor the first sustained nuclear chain re­ action had been achieved), should be established to prepare a constitution for such a world state. “The intellectual courage that split the atom ," they wrote, “should be called, on this very campus, to unite the world.” Underlying their response was clearly a feeling that an opportunity was being presented to restore “scholarship and theoretical thought in the solution o f basic problems o f politics”—intellectual responsibility that many regarded as having failed during the years before the Second W orld W ar. The time for deliberation should be “rigorously limited” to the year 1946, after which, they added fatefully, the draft constitution might be “too late."14 The institute was prom ptly established as an inter-university council w ith Humanities Division funds ($11,000 to 1947).* 11 By the first meeting in N o­ vember 1945, it had been retitled as the Committee to Frame a W orld Constitu­ tion. In addition to Hutchins, Borgese, and McKeon, other members included University of Chicago philosophy professor M ortimer J. Adler, dean o f the C hi­ cago Law School W ilber G. Katz; Chicago professor o f anthropology and dean of the Social Science Division Robert Redfield; Roosevelt “Brain Truster” and professor o f political science at Chicago Rexford Guy Tugwell; Harvard profes­ sor of religion W illiam E. Hodring; dean of Harvard Law James M. Landis; pro­ fessor o f government at Harvard Charles H. McDwain; Stanford professe» o f lit­ erature A lbert Guérard; chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank o f New York Beardsley Ruml; German scholar Erich Kahler of the New School for Social Re­ search; former S t John’s College president Stringfellow Barr; University o f To­ ronto professor o f political economy Harold A. Innis; and professor Reinhold 14 “Brief History of the Committee,” Common Cause, I (July 1947): 11-12; Bor­ gese and McKeon to Hutchins, 16 September 1945 [Doc. 2]; O. A. Borgese et al.. The City o f Man (New York: Viking, 1940), 18-19. 11D. Higgins to M. de Grazia, 5 March 1947, CFWC Papers. 1.1.

Hobart M. Hutchins: Raring a World ConstMuflon


N iebuhr o f Union Theological Sem inary.1* In the end, although they all con­ tributed to the dialogue, McKeon, Hocking, Landis, Ruml, and Niebuhr shrank from signing the d ra ft McKeon’s reason was that it inclined too much toward a unitary constitution. The Age of Nations Must End These busy academic men m et only for a day or two from month to month, w hich m eant that they rapidly lost the historic opportunity of A llied victory in W orld W arn . But large questions took time to resolve. W e m ight look closely a t how the Chicago committee addressed the problem of nationalism. The com­ m ittee m et on 6 -8 February 1947, two weeks before the Asheville congress at w hich U nited W orld Federalists was formed and a month before Truman an­ nounced the policy of containm ent “It is fundamental," Hutchins declared as the com m ittee reopened discussion on the basic issue of approaches to constitution m aking in a tim e o f deteriorating East-W est relations, “that the competing an­ archy o f nation states must really stop.”17 Since federations, historically, have tended tow ard unitary states, there was much discussion of whether the world constitution ought to directly establish a unitary state or “leave it to history.” M cKeon thought that an open proposal of a federal world state would itself be­ come “a force in history.” The others, however, preferred that the framers o f the fundam ental law leave less to chance or other forces, anticipate m atters, and create an ideal state. The whole issue came to a climax in the committee’s dis­ cussion o f the role they contemplated for the electoral regions.1* lh * U ne Sectoral Regions In their final published constitution, the world was divided into 9 regions for the purpose o f popular elections o f delegates to the Federal Convention, a kind o f electoral college that in turn would elect the world legislators, president, and other officers o f the world governm ent Regions were chosen instead of states for various theoretical, political, and technical reasons: the number o f states (54 in the U N . by 1947) was changing rapidly, their sizes were grossly disproportion­ ate (C hina was 3,500 times as populous as Iceland), many states wane not repub­ lics like the proposed world republic, popular representation was felt necessary to counter the opposition o f governments (especially those of the United States and the Soviet Union), and desire to keep the world legislature small (99 representa­ tives) required combining states for electoral purposes (part o f Scotland with Norw ay and Sweden, if there were to be one representative per 22 m illion persons). The regions proposed were electoral units, not regional republican govern­ m ents o r federations, which would have been even more utopian to try to create by fiat than one world federation. These electoral regions were conceived “not to supplant the extant states but to m ediate between them and the W orld State; not “ “Brief History,” pp. 13-14. ° Proceedings, Eleventh Meeting, Chicago, 6-8 February 1947 [Doc. 123], p. 10a. MIbid., pp. 23a-31a, 10a, 32a, 21a, 31a.



to abolish, but merely to remove by one degree the states from their traditional place in the federal legislature.” In principle, they were exactly like the national electoral districts, not coincident with state boundaries, that James M adison pro­ posed at Philadelphia, leaving the states only as adm inistrative units, like the counties. Nevertheless, the import o f regional voting, international representatives, and world legislation, which could hardly not interfere in domestic affairs in addition to foreign (given the maximal powers of the world government), was to progres­ sively abolish the nation-states. The committee sanguinely scheduled the strug­ gle over sovereignty for the ratification period. That was when a great, historic appeal had to be made to the people o f the world to lim it the power o f their gov­ ernments and to delegate general powers to the world government. (G renville Clark, with his assignments of various numbers o f national representatives [SO for the U.S., 20 for Japan, etc.) in his scheme o f weighted representation, was facing the same revolutionary issue, but he tended to pass over it discretely.) Regional voting would have served the same function as weighted represen­ tation—giving disproportionate voting power to the less populous but more in­ dustrialized, “modern,” and powerful states (Hutchins and others admitted it, too, was “discriminatory”)—but it had the great advantage o f not appearing undemo­ cratic. There was no table of numbers of national representatives with which to make invidious comparisons. An Indonesian from the Australasian region would not fe e l that his vote counted for less than that of an American; a Chinese would not have a vivid sense that his vote carried less weight than that o f a Russian. A sim ilar principle is at work in the U.S. rule for the election o f senators. A New Yorker does not complain o f discrimination because he elects two senators as does the Nevadan, though technically, since Nevada has so much less popula­ tion than New York, the individual Nevadan has m ore voting pow er than the New Y orker." MorsOus of Poduo The committee consciously appreciated themselves as creative political scien­ tists, akin to M arsilius of Padua in the 14th century, who regarded the city-state as a thing o f the past and reckoned with the nation-state in the m aking. So Hutchins, Börgese, Adler, and the others looked beyond the nation to regional and world federal organizations. Their constitution was conceived as a statem ent o f purpose to help bring about its own realization. They proposed regional elec­ toral units deliberately to defunctionalize nationalism ," the “great heresy” o f modem times. They wished to assemble representatives from other regions, es­ pecially Europe as a whole, in order to break the “bipolar character of the world.” They aimed at creating a new world order based on the equality, as far as possi­ ble, o f all human beings. The great object was the “restitution o f the people,” the exercise of the sovereignty of the people. They had a deep faith in the power o f human beings to solve their international problem s in the same way they u Proceedings, Eleventh Meeting, Chicago, 6-8 February 1947, pp. 48c et seq.

Robert M. Hutchins: Framing a World Constitution


solved their dom estic, if people could only le a n to think o f them selves as equals.* Gold Wer But before the Chicago committee could publish its draft world constitution, the Cold W ar began. The self-appointed drafters of a world constitution in Chi­ cago were astonished by the “finality and speed” with which national allies were transform ed into enemies. Börgese wrote that the committee could no longer base its deliberations on the assumption that “the Big Three band in hand" would progress toward a world state. He put the best gloss he could on events. The breakup o f the East-W est alliance, like the first use o f the atomic bomb, could be “the good news o f dam nation,” frightening mankind with hellfue into the righteous conduct necessary to create a unified society. W orld rule emerged now as the “only alternative” to world ruin. The m inim alists, who had banked on lim ited world government to prevent war while there was some “reason” to place hopes in great power amity, stood discredited before the maximalists, who advo­ cated a full world federal republic o f justice, based on appeal to the people.”

"ASaaodHurry” The com m ittee rapidly completed deliberations on its draft world constitu­ tion. Since the crucial regional issue had been effectively settled, even such grave issues as the world president, legislature, and judiciary proved relatively easy to solve. Inspired by a “sacred hurry,” committee members looked forward to circulating their final draft among leaders and experts w orld-w ide by the au­ tum n, then to publish. A proposed convention o f experts to ask questions, make comments, and revise the draft was rejected for want o f time. Indeed, Borgese thought, with some pardonable pride o f authorship, “The document cannot be im proved very much.” It could be replaced by another charter for a league o f sovereign states, or by a rigorously centralized, despotic or monarchical constitu­ tion, o r by a “technocratic” constitution, but as a constitution for a federal re­ public, it was coherent and workable. He was anxious to get the constitution to B ritish M .P. Henry Usborne, Senator Glen Taylor, and radical students in the burgeoning w orld government movement as something “to shoot at.” “No one is so megalomaniacal—not even m yself,” Börgese remarked at their last meet­ ing, “to think that we are going to save the world. But you never can tell.”* The constitution was duly signed by 11 of the original 16 members. The1 * Elisabeth Mann Borgese, “One World and Nine Realms: An Inquiry into the Problems of the Electoral Units," Common Cause, 1 (September 1947): 93-100. The source of their faith seems to have included the “great books,” which Hutchins and Adler were trying to reintroduce into American higher education. Cf. Mortimer J. Adler, “Justice,” Common Cause, 1 (January 1948): 249-255. 11 “Brief History,” p. 21. 11 “Brief History,” p. 22; Proceedings, Twelfth Meeting, Chicago, March 31 April 2, 1947 [Doc. 133]; Proceedings, Thirteenth Meeting, Chicago, 14-15 July 1947 [Doc. 145], pp. 3. 12, 18, 26.



loyally opposed Richard McKeon refused to sign on the grounds that the consti­ tution seemed “to err in inclining to a unitary state rather than a federation,” and Reinhold N iebuhr had long since withdrawn, objecting to the very attem pt to create world law. But charismatic Robert M. Hutchins, his friend the educational reform er M ortimer Adler, G. A. Börgese, Chicago Law School dean W ilber Katz, gloomy Erich K ah la, ebullient A lbert Guérard, professors Charles M cllwain, Robert Redfield, Rexford Tugwell, and Harold Innis, and the one-tim e attendee Stringfellow Barr pledged their names. Despite his enthusiasm, Professor Borgese modestly, yet with warm eloquence, summed up the work erf the committee: This has been the greatest democratic experience of my life because whatever I have contributed to that [next to last draft Constitution 141] is due, 75 per­ cent, to the cooperation, inspiration, critique, of all the present members.... The Committee must remain the same in function. It will not change its title. It will not be the Committee that has framed a world constitution. It will re­ main the Committee to frame a constitution.”

Common Coum A t last, in July 1947, the committee’s new journal, Common Cause (named after a book by G. A. Börgese during the war), began to appear. The tim e was late. W orld government advocates like the Chicago group, unable to anticipate national events, began to react to them, at least to slow the drift toward w ar by maintaining the existence o f a fundamental alternative. Their political style was vigorous argum ent in discussions, letters, speeches, and press in favor o f the practical establishm ent of world governm ent Chancellor Hutchins, in the lead article o f Common Cause, supported the recent proposal o f Henry Usboroe to prepare for unofficial elections o f representatives of the people, in the ratio o f one per m illion from every country, to a “W orld Constituent Assembly” in Gen­ eva by late 1950. This was likely to be an unwieldy body (2,400 representa­ tives, if all were elected); but the Chicago committee could offer a “pattern” o f a world constitution to guide them through a “wilderness o f immature and contra­ dictory proposals." W rote Hutchins:1* Time is of the essence. It is now or never. Indeed strait is the gate and nar­ row is the way which leads to life. The obstacles in the way of World Gov­ ernment and the unity of mankind are staggering. But the other way lies per­ dition.

Borges«'* Rlvcfry with Usborrw Henry Usbome, British proponent o f the Geneva 1950 peoples’ convention, briefly traveled to the United States in October 1947 to gather support for his “crusade." Börgese, at the height o f his hopes for the committee, all but tried to * McKeon to Borgese, 26 August 1947, CFWC Papers, 18.8; Proceedings, Thir­ teenth Meeting, Chicago, 14-15 July 1947 [Doc. 145], p. 12; “The Thirteenth Meet­ ing of the Committee,” Common Cause, 1 (August 1947): 68. MRobert M. Hutchins, “1950,” Common Cause, 1 (July 1947): 2-3.

Robert M. Hutchins: Raming q World Constitution


w iest leadership from the relatively modest Englishman. Before Usborne’s arri­ vai, Borgese printed a belligerent little piece in Common Cause criticizing the planned drafting convention of 2,400, unofficial elections, bypassing the U.N., and Geneva as a location (he preferred Oslo, if not Delphi). “In any case, the Founding Convention m ust be official and sovereign," be wrote. “There is no tim e left for tentative and haphazard approaches."8 “It is all very well for you to say that ‘The Founding Convention m ust be official,’” Usborne replied testily, “but what if the officials w ill not agree with us, and cannot be persuaded to change their m inds?... I have a feeling that much o f our frustration in recent years is due to this illusion that W orld Government can be created by the efforts of the statesm en o f sovereign national govern­ m ents.” The convention could not be sovereign, since a constitution was a “scrap o f paper'’ until ratified by national parliaments or peoples. The purpose o f his balloting was to demonstrate to the statesmen of America, Britain, France, Russia, and other nations that the people are “politically ready to support W orld G overnm ent” The committee he regarded as a “group of experts,” and their con­ stitution as a “national d raft"8 The tw o men m et briefly in Chicago, where Usborne and Borgese spoke to­ gether on radio for the Round Table o f the Air, b u t while relations rem ained outwardly cordial, the two men were marked as rivals. Borgese occasionally re­ peated this sort o f thing—once particularly during the W allace presidential cam­ paign with Rexford Tugwell— on the pages o f the not so Common Cause.” Chicago THbtmkOppojMon T o generate public interest Hutchins made a m ajor address to the University o f D enver Social Science Foundation’s series on “The Foundations for W orld O rder” in O ctober 1947. Talk about w orld government was not dangerous, Hutchins argued. “To say that the discussion o f world government is a criticism o f the U nited N ations is like saying that to talk about buying an automobile is an attack on the baby carriage industry."8 The conservative Chicago Tribune b it this bait and published an anticom m unist-style, front-page exposé o f the pri­ vately circulating draft constitution. It would “abolish the United States and all other countries," the Tribune warned the people; it was based on “M arxian prin­ ciples” and combined “Franklin D. Roosevelt and Karl M arx.” Robert Hutchins was “notorious” for having served on the advisory council of Moscow State Uni­ versity in 1935, and G. A. Borgese belonged to “well known communist fronts”

” Borgese, “The Founding Convention,” 41-43. MHenry Usborne, “Crusade for World Government,” Common Cause, 1 (October 1947): 123-24. D “Open Letter to Rexford G. Tugwell,” Common Cause, 2 (September 1948): 41; “Open Reply to Mr. Borgese,” Common Cause, 2 (October 1948): 81-84. ” “Hutchins Sees Universal Government as Only Ultimate (Choice] Left World,” Rocky Mountain News, 14 October 1947; Robert M. Hutchins, ’T he Constitutional Foundations of World Order,“ Common Cause, 1 (December 1947): 201-08; reprinted in Foundations fo r World Order (Denver University of Denver Press, 1949), 97-114.



like the American Committee to Save Refuges during the Spanish C ivil W ar. Nevertheless, the scoop was long enough to give valuable publicity to the sub* stance of the constitution, apart from numerous inaccuracies and innuendoes. Borgese gamely thought the charge of communism was a sign o f growing public notice, and he counter-published an elaborate correction, comparing the Tribune tow er to the Kremlin ram parts, “the two sturdiest strongholds against W orld Government.”9 MMmalst-Mcudmalst Controversy In the fall o f 1947, as the constitution continued to circulate among selected reviewers, the Committee to Frame a W orld Constitution touched off the longsm oldering “m inim alist-m axim alist” controversy within the movement over powers. The dispute went on fen* years. It was as divisive as the controversies over universal or partial initial m embership or over U N . reform o r peoples’ convention approaches. A t issue generally was whether the initial world govern­ m ent should have powers only to preserve the peace (minimalism) or also to ad­ vance justice (maximalism). But the question raised broader issues. W hat should be the structure o f world government? Should one even discuss structure? If not, what did one really mean by “world government”? W hat was one’s attitude to the colonized peoples in Asia and Africa, rising for independence? To the colored races? To American Negroes? D id one really believe in economic rights? In some accommodation between W estern democracy and communism? Should the United N ations be supported for the time being? Historically, did the atom ic bomb truly marie a revolutionary new age? Spit with United World Fbderalsts The committee initially had the advantage in this controversy. G. A. Borgese and his contributors to Common Cause had with great learning and esprit thought out the issues, and they had concrete, written documents —above all, the draft world constitution—to show exactly what they had in mind for the goal. The first casualty in this m inim alist-m axim alist controversy was close working relationships between the committee and United W orld Federalists. In October, several University of Chicago students, including Harris W offord, founder of Student Federalists, and Stephen Benedict and Phillips Ruopp, assis­ tant editors of Common Cause, prepared a position paper to convert U nited W orld Federalists to the maximal creed at their S t Louis convention in Novem­ ber. The paper bristled with phrases from the Chicago committee and the radical student and veteran group W orld Republic. Limited world government, they » “World State’s Super-Secret Constitution!” Chicago Tribune, 17 November 1947; “World State’s Super-Secret Constitution!” Common Cause, 1 (December 1947): 239-40. Another response: “No, the world government movement is not a plot. It is the attempt of serious-minded people to think their way through the baf­ fling contradictions of a victory which has brought no security to the victors.” ’The World State ’Plot,’” Chicago Sun, 19 November 1947.

Robert M. Hutchins: Frorning o World Constitution


wrote, will appear to most o f the world as “an American device for m aintaining the status quo." A lobbying organization will become dominated by prom inent Americans for whom the cause demands "no sacrifice" and who are unable to in* spire an "intelligent and responsible grassroots base.” Unlimited world govern­ ment, on the other hand, would be attractive to tw o-thirds o f the world’s peoples and hence to Russia. U.S. federalists would thereby prove they bad "decisively won the day over American imperialists and nationalists." United W orld Feder­ alists should undertake an "ideological” program, starting with Chicago commit­ tee m aterials, and become a more "democratic” organization, with a “represen­ tative administration" and "large degree of chapter autonomy."90 The students’ m aneuver was turned aside at S t Louis, but the issue would not die. Finally, as the date approached for publication of the Chicago draft, and after UW F had been approached to help publicize the docum ent Cord M eyer wrote to Borgese, explaining that “the difference was one of timing and tactics.’’91 On the eve o f publication, the UWF Executive Council adopted a strict policy o f welcoming the "illustrative world constitution" for the purpose o f discussion, as avow ed by the com m ittee itself. As a guide for political action, however, so “detailed” a document was premature, when “consensus is desirable on certain broad convictions." Quincy Wright's Minimalst Grttkfem M inim alist intellectual criticism , based not on misunderstanding o f the draft (as so often by critics) but on deep study o f history and law, came from the dis­ tinguished Chicago professor of international law Quincy W right W right ob­ jected to an advance copy o f the draft world constitution on the grounds o f pro­ cess. A constitution, he argued, is both a description o f how the authority or government in any society operates (standards, rules, practices) and a prescription o f how individuals are to behave as officials or citizens. In that sense, a world constitution already existed, though the authority of the United Nations was very lim ited compared to the authorities of the 70 territorial states, and though accept­ ed supranational principles of conduct (aggression prohibited) were often ob­ served in the breach. The problem was to improve the existing constitution. This could not be done by an intellectual act of draftsmanship, but had to be done by a “process of developm ent," involving all the people, for it is "characteristic o f people to sus­ pect a plan, in the making o f which they have not participated.” The Baruch plan was rejected, W right explained, because it was stamped “made in America”; Grom yko’s, because it was "made in Russia.” The Chicago committee’s consti­ tution—no m atter how equitable— similarly looked like an American plan. Even the flaw ed drafts o f the U.N. Charter had the m erit o f being worked out in a MHarris Wofford et al., UWF: Limited or Unlimited? 31 October 1947, CFWC Pa­ pers, 24.5. " Benedict to Meyer, 6 February 1948, Benedict Papers; Meyer to Borgese, 9 Feb­ ruary 1948, Lilly Library, UWF Papers, 33; UWF and the Committee to Frame a World Constitution. Policy Statement, 15 February 1948, ibid., 57.



combined process by the great powers at Dumbarton Oaks and by all the United Nations at San Francisco. Though the w orld was faced by the alternatives o f em pire o r federation (W right had observed this since 1916), no artificial constitution-m aking could hasten the process. Progress had to be made through utilizing the political pro­ cesses available in the U N ., United Nations Educational Social and Cultural Or­ ganization (UNESCO), and the specialized agencies. Gradual transformation to a federation could be seen in such steps as the “Little Assembly" proposal, efforts to modify the veto, and plans for a declaration on human rights and for an inter­ national crim inal code under U.N. courts. “It is necessary to begin from where we are,” W right concluded.” Ptibkcrion of tho World Constitution Just After the Czech Coup Finally, in M atch 1948, the Preliminary D raft o f a World Constitution ap­ peared in the pages o f Common Cause. “W ith shatteringly inept tim ing," com­ mented the Chicago Herald American on 22 M arch. “M ost surprisingly fit,” re­ plied B örgese. A Communist party coup in Czechoslovakia had in February forced that last East European country behind the Iron Curtain, the U N . Atomic Energy Commission was at an impasse, and there was w ar in Palestine. In three months the Berlin blockade would begin. The Cold W ar was a reality. The opportunity to establish world government by nonviolent agreement had long since passed, but world federalists had staked too much hope and honor on their patiently worked out alternative to lightly abandon i t If they could not guide the Big Three to a more perfect union, world government advocates could a t least slow the coming o f W orld W ar in with a resistance movement that had an alternative. They traded to see their times as a grand watershed in history, when the m ost fateful choice would be made. “No alternative was left after M arch but W orld Government or W orld War, present or proxim ate," wrote the passionate G. A. Börgese. “W orld governm ent... is the last call to America and the W est if American and W estern liberty choose to survive and lead.... W hat is desperately needed must be desperately willed."” UM» Immadkıt» Influence Public response to this profound and visionary docum ent indicates that in early 1948 the Cold W ar was rapidly outstripping the movement to establish world governm ent The New York Times and Herald American merely reported the publication w ithout com m ent Time lightly called the world constitution “something to think ab out” The Washington Post thought it was an im practi­ cal extreme, the opposite extreme of which was despair o f any international ac­ tion; a practical middle course, according to the Post, was to exercise A rticle 51 o f the U.N. Charter. This was a sign o f growing opinion in favor of w hat next* ” Wright to Borgese, 17 November 1947; printed as Quincy W right “Constitu­ tion-M aking as Process,” Common Cause, 1 (February 1948): 284-86. ** “Preliminary Draft of a Work! Constitution," Common Cause, 1 (March 1948); “March and After,” Common Cause, 1 (May 1948): 363.

Robert M. Hutchins: Framing a World Constitution


year would be the North Atlantic m ilitary alliance. So the Committee to Frame a W orld Constitution had little immediate influ­ ence. The discussion o f w orld government was ably m arshaled in Common Cause, though the journal had very restricted circulation (12,000). Only one or two trivial changes were ever permitted in the Preliminary Draft o f a World Con­ stitution. M ost other wings o f the movement politely ignored the m axim alist Chicago group or placed them on some height above the political scene. So lit­ tle im pact did the com m ittee have that to this day its real contributions have been alm ost completely forgotten or overlooked, even by informed international­ ist scholars like Inis Claude or Richard A. Falk (at least until 1993). M inimalism, such as that o f Grenville Clark or United W orld Federalists, re­ m ained the mainstream. But, though Börgese and his group did not have priori­ ty, the Chicago constitution and supporting papers were in many ways the goad to Clark’s finished m inim alist work, which cannot be understood without com­ parison to the open political theorizing o f the maximalists. no nononoi Lffoowsnfp Later, at one of the few moments o f cross-contact, R o b o t Hutchins asked G renville Clark at the Century Club in New York: “Why is it that when virtu­ ally all thinking men know we m ust have w orld government to achieve peace, so little is done about it by die politicians?” 14 The Chicago committee was un­ able to interest any nationally prominent leader to take the common cause to the people, which is the main explanation for its failure, as for Clark’s. N ational leaders never lost the initiative over events; the world federalist movem ent after 1947 became one largely of reaction to national initiatives. The Chicago committee, like United W orld Federalists, was too late. It took tim e to think through a fundamental alternative to Realpolitik or to organize a popular m ovem ent to pressure national governments to delegate certain points o f sover­ eignty to a world government.

x io n Am m an uorainunon This was precious time lo st By 1948, the seeming threat o f w ar convinced m ost o f the popular masses and their leaders—except for a creative minority in the federalist movement—that the only safe course was to revert to national pro­ gram s o f m ilitary defense. The Chicago committee did not produce a disguised version o f an Atlantic union against Russia. Its members proposed a true world republic, but, because they had no participating Soviet representatives, the con­ stitution still looked “American.” Despite the regional innovation, the clauses on property affected with a federal interest, the planning agency to meld capitalist and socialist economies, and all Börgese’s eloquence in behalf o f the colonized m ajority o f m ankind, their neglect o f the process o f constitution-m aking, as Quincy W right pointed out, produced the impression of an alien docum ent Few could make the intellectual leap to see the Chicago constitution, not as som ething to be accepted but as a model for a working constitution to be, in w Clark to Hutchins, 30 November 1949, Robert M. Hutchins Papers (A), 35.8.



turn, drafted in a world constitutional convention. W hen United W orld Federal­ ists refused to carry the banner, all that was left was Henry Usbome’s even more quixotic movement for a peoples’ convention. Henry W allace was the sole lead­ ing American politician who challenged the course o f Truman’s foreign policy, but only Rexford G. Tug well of the committee supported him. Political imagi­ nation soon became stunted by anti-communism. The prediction that mankind faced a choice between o th er world government or world war has not been realized to date. History always offers more alterna­ tives than theory. W hen the prediction was made, the tim es lent them selves only too easily to the interpretation that w ar was coming, on analogy with the craning erf W orld W ar n . Indeed, when open East-W est w ar broke out in Korea, many in the world federalist movement felt that the long-predicted W orld W ar m was at hand,which was raie of the most important causes for the collapse o f the m ovem ent On the other hand, while nuclear war has been avoided by deterrence, there have been, at tim e of writing, over ISO “sm all" wars, and one wonders what the end o f the general arms race will be. If world war cranes, the survivors w ill grimly acknowledge the truth of the committee’s prediction. Cold Wor o Dispute about Justice As a motivation fra- seeking to establish world governm ent however, atomic fear proved weak, even “American,” as the Chicago framers themselves warned. W hat was needed was a bright vision o f justice to attract the suffering m ajority o f mankind. Börgese came to understand justice as colonial independence, an end to racial discrim ination, and im partial international programs o f economic and social development. He was never able to persuade the movement and hence the W est to accept such a vision, which would have required sacrifices of substance and comfortable illusions. Such sacrifices have to be compared with the actual cost o f m ilitary expenditures since, not to mention the cost and pain o f general w ar itself, if it ever cranes. A historian may find it hard to escape the view that justice was what, as Bör­ gese said, the Cold W ar was really all about Because men and women could not agree on the nature of justice, on the powers to be delegated to a world govern­ m en t they had to endure a longer period o f strife whose end threatened to be world war.

16 The Crusade and the World M ovement Unless some effective World Super-Government can be set up and brought quickly into action, the prospects for peace and human progress are dark and doubtful. —Winston Churchill, Address at United Europe Committee Meeting, Albert Hall, 14 May 1947 Citizens of the World! The atomic weapon threatens with the most atrocious death each man, each woman, and each child. The war-blaze of yesterday is not even yet extin­ guished. Who would dare to state that it cannot at any time set again the whole earth ablaze? H ie armament race is accelerating everywhere. Whole peoples are starving to death everywhere, while others choke under the threat of overproduction and unemployment The cry of the anguished peoples who want to live is arising everywhere, but in vain. Will their cry be beard by the statesmen? This depends on you. Citizens of the World! —Abbé Pierre, Montreux Congress of the World Movement for World Federal Government 23 August 1947

- j Horry UAxxne, Winston Q w rchi, Ernest Bovtn H e n ry Usborne, who gave the Chicago committee the impetus to publish and who generally set the pace o f the world government movement toward 1950, was a M ember o f Parliam ent (M .P.), elected in the Labour party landslide o f 1945. It was U sborne’s unfortunate fate to be pitted, with only modest support from other new M .P.s and very occasionally from high officials in the Attlee govern­ m ent, against the tow ering historical figure in the opposition C onservative benches o f W inston Churchill. Churchill is not generally remembered, especial­ ly in America, as linked with movements that would liquidate the British Em­ pire, but after the Second W orld W ar he deftly guided public sentiment for Euro­ pean or w orld union toward institutions that would not compromise British sov­ ereignty. In the end, it was Labour's own Ernest Bevin who as foreign m inister defeat­ ed C hurchill with proposals that became the W estern m ilitary alliance o f the N orth A tlantic treaty. Usborne was left behind in this historic struggle, unable to m arshal the internationalist forces to achieve his own greater vision. Never­ theless, his efforts cast light on the problem o f establishing world government in our tim e, and die history of the world government movement necessarily now



moves to Europe and first to G reat Britain. W e have already traced the development o f Usbome’s ideas from socialism to European federalism at war’s end to world federalism a f ta first use o f atom ic bombs. From November 1945, when Parliament debated ratification o f the U İ4. Charier and Usbome first spoke on world government, to November 1946, when the Labour party employed Usbome to move acceptance o f the king’s speech from die throne, there was some flux in British policy.1 But Bevin did not follow up his speech on world law with a proposal to the U.N. General Assembly to transform the United Nations into a “world security parliament” when the Assembly m et first in London. The United States and the Soviet Union were both opposed, as New York Times correspondent James Reston concluded Reston thought the question o f transforming the General Assem­ bly into an elected world legislature was moving “outside the realm o f academic discussion and into the realm of international politics.’’ Britain, to him, was in­ terested in “world government” as an ultim ate “objective”—not an “immediate proposal.” But the United States was opposed on grounds that the Senate would not accept it, and the Soviet Union objected that sovereignty, or national inde­ pendence, protected states from interference in their internal affairs.* Disappointment with Bevin, dismay at the split between East and W est that began to open at the Moscow conference in December, and doubt about the ade­ quacy of the future United Nations, produced a resolve in Usbome and sympa­ thetic M .P.s to find an approach to world government that would “bypass” the remaining absolute sovereign states. Eventually they decided there was only one plan that was both practical and still effective. That was the plan to hold a “W orld Peoples’ Constituent Assembly” (peoples’ convention or PC) in 1950.* Usbome'* World Föderal*t Resolution The process of considering alternatives and drafting the plan took 14 months —a fateful delay, if unavoidable, during which the Cold W ar rapidly developed. M embers o f Parliam ent were busy enough with establishing B ritain’s first so­ cialist government, winding down the war, and liquidating the empire. It took time to line up co-sponsors for so revolutionary a project as establishing world government by appeal around governments directly to the people. By January 1947, when Usbome introduced his world federation resolution, he had 72 co­ sponsors;1 4* and eventually in 1948, when the plan was well in place, over 100 were associated, including Sir W illiam Beveridge, Bertrand Russell, and Sir John Boyd Orr.* These numbers in Commons and Lords were com parable to the 1Great Britain, Parliament, House of Commons, Hansard’s Parliamentary Debates, 22-23 November 1945, H.C. 416, cols. 611-13, 678-81, 759-87. 1 James Reston, “Britain W ill Seek Security Congress Not Bound by Veto,” New York Times, 14 January 1946. ’ Harry Hopkins, “Crank or Crusader?” John Bull, 24 January 1948, 12. 4 “British M.P.’s Urge World Federation,” New York Times, 1 February 1947. * E. R. Millington, “World Government by 1955,” Scottish Cooperator, 7 Febru­ ary 1948.

Th« Crusade and the World Movement


num bers o f co-sponsors o f world federalist legislation in the U.S. Congress by 1949. Usborne nevertheless pressed on. He introduced his world federalist resolu­ tion in January 1947. The London Times o f 1 February 1947 buried its notice o f the aspiring resolution between big stories on the Palestine debate and the re­ cent cricket match between England and Australia. Edith W ynner tried to bring the news to prominent American federalists. One was Senator Glen Taylor, who would introduce his second world federalist resolution in Congress a half year later. Another was Grenville Clark, who cautioned that the resolution ought not to propose federation “with any other nations willing to do so,” which m ight leave out the great powers. It should specify, Clark added, that at least m ost o f them were necessary for a workable world government* Though every week Us­ borne asked the leadership for a debate, he was unable ever to bring the resolu­ tion to the floor, and in fact he did not speak again on world government until the general parliamentary debate on W estern Union (the Atlantic alliance) in May 1948. Th« Plan for th e Peoples' Convention in Geneva In 1950 Usbom e, as leading vice-president of Britain’s Federal Union, had been in­ strum ental in hosting the 1946 Luxembourg conference, which set in motion the establishm ent o f the W orld Movement for W orld Federal Government (umbrella organization o f work! federalist organizations in many countries) and later the European Union o f Federalists (the more limited organization o f European feder­ alists).* 7 A t a W orld M ovement meeting, in Brussels on 4 M ay 1947, Usborne announced the essentials of his plan to hold an unofficial W orld Constituent As­ sem bly in 1950. His Parliamentary group would lead, lending legitimacy in the first instance to what was really a revolutionary proposal. The problem o f w ar was urgent in the minds o f Usbom e’s parliam entarians. The common people everywhere understood the outlines of a solution, they con­ tended. There had to be created a “Charter'’ (constitution) of the higher authority so that statesm en could settle their disagreem ents non violently. The charter would show them how to “transfer” the necessary sovereign powers (particularly the control o f arm ed forces) to the authority, while retaining the powers neces­ sary for their national jurisdictions. The idea was for the states to delegate “enumerated” powers, exactly as in the U.S. federal Constitution, while retaining all others. W hat was needed was a limited and balanced world constitution. Usbom e proposed that unofficial elections o f popular representatives to draft the w orld constitution, in the ratio o f one per million, be held in as many coun­ tries as possible in the summer o f 1950. Elections had to be unofficial to avoid the taint o f state manipulation, and besides, governments would probably not al­ low use o f state electoral machinery for an opposition movement. But elections w ould provide the ultimate legitimacy for the issue. Since Britain had a popula* Clark to Wynner, 10 February 1947, Scbwimmer-Lloyd Collection, 760. 7 Proceedings, International Conference of Federalists. Luxembourg, 14-16 Octo­ ber 1946, UWF Papers. 42.



ÜOD at the time o f 38 m illion, Usbome planned a national unofficial ballot to elect 38 représentatives. The United States would elect 130, and so on. These representatives would then gather as a W orld Constituent Assembly in Geneva in the fall o f 1950 to draft the world constitution. Allowing time for the drafting, circulation o f the text, amendment, ratification, and implementation o f the con­ stitution, it was not inconceivable that world federal government would be a fact by 1955.'

The Ciusode for World Govommunf The next month, Usbome and his dauntless little group circulated in Parlia­ m ent a draft o f a fuller statem ent o f their plan, which became the classic little pamphlet The Plan in Outline. They were getting an organization together, the Crusade for W orld G overnm ent Besides Usbome, secretary, they included the Reverend Gordon Lang, chairman, and W ing Commander Ernest M illington, a particularly able speaker, they led an inner circle o f about 10. Another 50 M P .s signed the draft but took little part in the work. The Plan in Outline made somewhat clearer how the unofficial elections would be held. Candidates would present themselves before the Parliamentary Committee of the Crusade, which would have to organize an “electoral machine” in their home districts by use of post and press and many volunteers. Usbome estim ated it would take 500,000 volunteers and £1 m illion to get out the vote in England, Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland. His model was the Peace Ballot o f 1934, organized by Viscount Cecil o f Chelwood and the League o f N ations associations of the time to determine if there was popular support for B ritain's remaining in the League as the crisis with Hitler’s Germany gathered. Over 11.5 m illion votes were cast in that unofficial ballot (10.4 m illion in favor o f the League). The cost in those days had been £11,000, and some 500,000 volun­ teers had gotten out the vote. Usbome declared that if he could get one-quarter o f B ritain's population (about 12 m illion people) to vote for world government in his unofficial election, be would have sufficient popular mandate to make rati­ fication o f the resultant W orld Charter an issue in the next parliam entary elec­ tions. Ratification then would be a “political certainty.’” ' “World Government in Five Years.” 4 May 1947, Press Release (Reuter’s), Com­ mittee to Frame a World Constitution Papers, 30.1; “British ‘Election’ for World Government,” Birmingham Post, S May 1947; “British Vote for World M.P.s in 1955,” Birmingham Gazette. 5 May 1947; “World Government Scheme,” Glasgow Herald, 5 May 1947. ’ The British Parliamentary Committee, Crusade fo r World Government: The Plan in Outline, n.d., c. August 1947, Committee to Frame a World Constitution Papers, 30.1. Usborne and other enthusiasts seem to bave regarded this pamphlet as histori­ cally analogous to the U.S. Congress's invitation to the Philadelphia Convention in 1787 or to that of Louis XVI to the Estates Generaux in 1789. One of his schemes to raise money was to sell a deluxe, autographed, limited edition of the Plan for $500 each. By mid-1949, of 100 copies, he had sold 26. Usborne to G. A. Borgese, 1 July 1949, ibid.

Th* Qusadft and th* World Movurraitf


This was the daring plan that so impressed the Chicago committee when Borgese and others began publishing Common Cause. There were difficulties and ambiguities, such as the open avowal o f proportional representation (one per m illion), the prospect of a single-party “election," and other things that Ameri­ cans particularly objected to when Usbome tried to transplant his crusade from the old M other Country to the New W orld. But the great point was that the plan presented a clear vision o f world government as the solution to the problem o f war, and it proposed means to that end that were practicable and efficacious. Ih o Huodquartian ot 5 Old Pobco Yard In short, the plan was sound enough as a revolutionary proposal. Usbom e m ade over his W estminster office at 5 Old Palace Yard into a kind of headquarters for the crusade. His Parliamentary Committee m et there weekly—not, indeed, the 70 or 80 M .P.s that they were counting as supporters in their literature but a half dozen or so who were committed to the dream. A Candidate Selection Panel also began to m eet there on occasion; John Hoyland, Quaker historian and mem­ ber o f the W oodbrooke Settlem ent in Birmingham, was the first selected can­ didate, followed by M .P.s Usbome, Edith W ills, and Clive W illiams.10* Youth from the Student M ovement for W orld Government (predecessor to W orld Student Federalists), which Fred Camey of W orld Republic had organized, often dropped in." So did more seasoned federalists from Federal Union. Edith W ynner arrived from America. She came for the Brussels meeting in May and stayed through the M ontreux congress in A ugust She straggled in planning m eetings for the rights of small organizations like her own, helped prepare The Plan in Outline for the press, accompanied Usbome to his speaking engage­ m ents, and advised him about how to mobilize the many federalist organizations w hose leaders were due to arrive at M ontreux.11 As that was an international ev en t in which Henry Usbome and Edith W ynner played only two o f the leading roles, our story m ust now shift to Switzerland. A World Government Movement In Fourteen Countries W e have already traced the origin o f the future W orld M ovement for W orld Federal Government a t Luxembourg in 1946. But that produced only a liaison group, headed by the U .S.'s Tom Griessemer, who was charged with organizing a form al founding convention the next year. He raised $15,000 for the purpose. G riessem er and the group shrewdly scheduled this congress (as it was formally called in the m inutes) at the beautiful Lake Geneva resort town o f M ontreux, during the height o f the summer season, on 17-24 August 1947. It was a time >• “One World, One Government,’’ News Review, 26 June 1947. » ‘“World Is on Thin Ice’ So Trudy [Schneider] Packed Her Skates,” Birmingham Dispatch, 9 June 1947. u “World Constituent Assembly,” Manchester Guardian, 11 June 1947. Usborne, during Britain’s postwar austerity period, was able to contribute only £80.15 for her visit. Haywood to Camey, 27 1948, Schwimmer-Lloyd Collection, T64.



and a place for thinking about peace.11 In the intervening year, the Baruch plan for the international control o f ato­ mic energy had hem defeated, the Truman doctrine had been announced, and, only the month before, the Russians had walked out o f the Paris meetings to im ple­ m ent the M arshall plan for European recovery. The Cold W ar bad begun. So it was in an atmosphere o f urgency and hope, fear and delight that some 300 dele­ gates and observers from 51 federalist organizations in 14 countries assembled in M ontreux to found what was finally called the W orld M ovement for W orld Fed­ eral Government, or, more briefly, the W orld Movement (WMWFO or WM). In principle, their task was to federate their organizations, as they were urging the nations to do. This proved as difficult for the federalists to achieve as it was for the w orld.* 1*4 The Monlraux Congress of the World Movement, August 1947 On Sunday, 17 August 1947, the founders o f the W orld Movement for W orld Federal Government bravely assembled at the Swiss town o f M ontreux’s elegant Palais Hotel. The first plenary session was held that afternoon in the hotel's domed. Renaissance-style Pavilion des Sports; business sessions and political forums in the Aula or G reat Hall of the nearby Collège de M ontreux. The mayor of M ontreux welcomed the assembly, and Dr. Max Habicht, p résidait of the temporary council, made the opening address. Count Sforza sent an encouraging m essage,11 as did Albert Einstein,14 and, m ost significantly from the immediate

" Memo from Tom O. Griessemer, Secretary, MFWG, to Council, member organi­ zations, and Luxembourg delegates, 4 February 1947, World Republic Papers. u Minutes of the Congress of the World Movement for World Federal Government at Montreux, Switzerland, 17-24 August 1947, UWF Papers, 42. The countries for­ mally represented were: Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Great Britain, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United States of America. Another 10 sent observers, including Czechoslovakia, Germany, Greece, Turkey, and South Africa. u Sforza’s message was not recorded, but be was on record in favor of world gov­ ernment. He said, on returning from exile to join the Italian government: “After the second world war we all have to learn a new language, which cannot be English or French or Italian alone, or even just European, but must be worldwide instead.... Eu­ rope, of which both Great Britain and Russia, together with a repentant and renewed Germany, should be a part, is none other than one of the shores of that big lake which ... links us to America.... The future of the world lies ... in a world federation ... a union of all peoples.” “Carlo Sforza, Italy’s Foreign M inister,” United Nations World, March 1947, p. 14. “ 'T he supranational character of the conference makes it likely that its proposals will impress the various governments and nations much more than local groups could possibly do. May the conference succeed in demonstrating that, under pressure of compelling necessity, differences in national viewpoints can be resolved.” Otto Nathan and Heinz Norden, eds., Einstein on Peace (New York: Schocken, 1960), 421.

Th» Qusode and the World Movement


political point o f view, so did Britain’s foreign m inister, Ernest Bevin:'7 I wish your meeting in Montreux all success. Exactly two years ago, on Au­ gust 16, 1945,1 said in a speech: “The idea of a World Government is some­ thing which must be carefully nursed in order that the right atmosphere may be created. It is not something which can be imposed from the top, but must be the result of growth.” Such growth your movement is designed to foster, and I am sure you will not allow yourself to be discouraged by present diffi­ culties. The world has made, I still firmly believe, a good start with the de­ velopment of the United Nations. I wish you good luck in your efforts to achieve a still higher aim.

H abicht’s addressed the gathering on the meaning o f worid federal govern­ m ent. It was to be universal, embracing all peoples (hence “worid”). It was not to be a centralized, unitary government, abolishing national governments, but a governm ent whose powers were restricted to world problems (hence “federal”). And it was not to be an association of sovereign states, paralyzed by the una­ nim ity rule, but a government containing a representative legislature with pow­ ers to enact world law reaching to individuals; it should also have courts and po­ lice forces to enforce the peace (hence “government”). He drew the analogy for the worid o f the Swiss Federation in the m idst of Europe’s quarreling nations. D osing with acknowledgment o f the achievement o f the nations in agreeing to establish the United Nations, Habicht called on the federalists assembled to work toward Ma still higher aim—World Federal Government. "" N o prom inent politician who might lead the nations toward federation ap­ peared, but four M .P.s in Usborne’s circle, one Italian deputy, and one Frendi assemblyman came, as did briefly Italian socialist and antifascist author Ignazio Silone. Nevertheless, some new figures appeared on the scene who made impor­ tant contributions to the congress and to die cause o f world government in the years to come. Anker Kirkeby, Danish journalist, and Halt Olsen, leader o f Een Verden, largest federalist organization after UW F, were there. Among the French, who had the largest num ber o f organizations represented, there was Alexandre Marc o f La Fédération, who would become a close co-worker with Elisabeth Marrn B örgese when she later took over much o f the direction o f the W orid M ovement (she was not herself at M ontreux). The excitable and highly committed Resistance fighter Lieutenant Colonel Robert Sarrazac-Soulage o f Le Front Humain des Citoyens du Monde, who later became the manager of Garry D avis, contributed what some regarded as “hysterics” to the gathering.1* A lso present as before were the distinguished French political scientist Jean Larmeroux, who became the first president o f the W orld Movement, the Belgian M aurice Cosyn, the Luxembourgeois Henri Koch, who became head o f the little " WMWFG, Stop War (congress brochure], n.d., post 24 August 1947, p. 3, Schwimmer-Lloyd Collection, T63. “ Ibid., 3—4. '* “Federalists o f the Worid. Unite!” World Government News, September 1947, pp. 1-2.



propaganda office, the Italians Santi Paladino and Carlo Vergani, and the Dutch Rodriguez Brent, W itte Hoogendijk, and Gunnar Knös. There were other federal­ ist leaders from Austria, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and New Zealand. In Usbom e’s group, M.P. V ictor Collins made im portant contributions to the resultant “M ontreux Declaration,” and Reverend Gordon Lang became first chairm an o f the executive committee (though he failed later to perform his office). Frances L. Josephy and M onica W ingate, long-tim e leaders of Federal Union, came. The United States had the largest delegation (68), which included G eorgia Lloyd (Campaign for W orld Government), Edith W ynner (International Cam­ paign for W orld Government), Noel and Violet Rawnsley (the Federalists), R ed Carney (W orld Republic), and Fyke Farmer (who later got elected from Tennes­ see to Usbom e’s peoples’ convention). The large United W orld Federalist con­ tingent included Edward T. Clark, who became the first treasurer, Tom Griessemer, o f course, Carlton College professor Reginald Lang, L.M. Schultz, who later chaired the finance committee, and many students: Charles Haywood, who would take an active part in W orld Student Federalists, Claire Lindgren, Harris W offord, Foster Parmelee, Gilles Corcos, and Trudy Schneider.* Honb Wofford and th« Link to Czechoslovakia Harris W offord, founder o f Student Federalists and at the time a student at the University o f Chicago (where he fell very much under the influence o f the Com­ m ittee to Frame a W orld Constitution), made an impression mi the congress out o f all proportion to his years. Two days before the congress, W offord went to Prague for the W orld Youth Festival and interviewed Foreign M inister Jan M asaryk, who later was m ysteriously killed after the Communist party coup o f 1948. M asaryk bitterly complained against Truman, reported W offord, for label­ ing Czechoslovakia “Red," and approved “One W orld” as the “only rational atti­ tude” for a European. Wofford brought a few Czech students trailing behind him to the Swiss congress to unite the world. This welcome contact with the one country that m ight have been a bridge between East and W est inspired the con­ gress to propose holding its 1948 meeting in Prague.“ W offord was also notable for his astute political analysis o f the whole move­ m ent for world government as revealed at M ontreux,* for bis contribution to the M ontreux declaration, which he and Edith Wynner largely drafted,* and for his 1* MMinutes of the Congress of the WMWFG at Montreux, pp. 1-3, UWF Papers, 42. *' Harris Wofford, “Perhaps a Corpse, Never Again a Refugee,” Interview with Jan Masaryk, United Nations World, June 1948. pp. 4-5. ” Harris Wofford, “Montreux: World Movement in Microcosm,” Common Came, 1 (November 1947): 161-63. ” Wynner to Killby, 20 October 1947, quoted by Finn Launen, Federalism and World Order, Compendium II (Copenhagen: World Federalist Youth, mimeographed, 1972), pp. 29-30.

Th» G usadtandîh» Worid Movamerr


inspiration a t the founding o f W orld Student Federalists at M ontreux.14 Tall, dark, and handsome, “easy on the eyes," as Edith W ynner grudgingly adm itted even after she became estranged from him, W offord was charismatic, able, and full o f ideas ahead o f his time. Generally, the students, who numbered about half (ISO) o f all the attendees at M ontreux, bad a leavening influence. W hen speeches were too long, they used to chant, “Action, action, we want action.”” PoMcai Issues ftesoivod a t Monfroux Political questions constantly broke into discussions of organization. The French in particular felt that the question o f European federation, which Church­ ill was making a top political issue throughout Europe, had to be discussed im­ m ediately, and they corrected the French version o f the m ovem ent’s name. M ouvement Universel pour une Confédération Mondiale. (In French, gouvern­ aient m eans executive, coercive power, while confédération is the équivalait o f w hat others m eant by federation.) Sir John Boyd Orr, then director-general o f the U N .’s Food and Agricultural Organization and later, after be bad resigned in frustration, the second president o f the W orld Movement, gave a notable address on functional cooperation, but m ost delegates were not interested.” There were m any delays due to the complicated voting procedure and much organizational jealousy, exactly as among states.” On the third day a resolutions committee was appointed, consisting o f Hoogendijk, Collins, W offord, Wynner, and three others. They received resolutions from individuals and drafted a grand joint resolution, which became the Montreux declaration. Hoogendijk was elected chairman; he and two others screened reso­ lutions; and, as W ynner told the story, she and W offord prepared drafts, then w orked till 1 AM . on the fifth day, with “tremendous brain-beating,” trying to com bine them.” The concern that seemed to draw all others in its train was whether or not to support the United Nations. W offord, in bis later retrospective written for Com­ m on Cause, observed that most European federalists had no interest in the Amer­ ican slogan “Strengthen the U.N.” To Europeans, the U.N. “had gone the way o f all leagues” and was “just another ambassadorial League of Nations.” They thought the people could only be aroused to enthusiasm by a new start—a move­ m ent to create a new world constitution, not to amend the old U.N. Charter—and so Europeans tended to support Usbome’s plan for a world constituent assembly (PC). The Czechs and others who had had any contact with Communists, on the * M“Montreux Convention Produces Notable Resolutions, New Student Body, Wof­ ford Reports,” Freedom and Union, October 1947, p. 19. 8 Elizabeth Nordentoft, For at de alle ma vaere eet: Historien om Een Verden (Kobenhavn: Eget Forlag, 1967). 26; quoted by Finn Laursen, Federalism and World Order, D: 124. * John Boyd Orr, “Only Two Courses Now—War or World Unity,” Federal News, March 1948, p. 1. 8 Minutes, Montreux Congress, pp. 4-7. * Wynner to Killby, 20 October 1947.



other hand, "felt that the U.N. still had symbolic advantages for securing Rus­ sian participation.” Others, too, faced with starvation, collapse, and chaos on the continent, put hopes in C hurchill's European union, the M arshall plan, o r U.N. economic and social agencies. W offord found no support whatsoever for the American concept o f "lim ited" world government, with powers only to control atomic energy and weapons o f m ass destruction. "To non-American world staters," he observed, “this idea sounded m ore like a frightened U.S. trying to lock up the weapons that m ight defeat it, than like W orld G overnm ent" Asiatics, though unrepresented at Mon­ treux, he doubted would be interested in any world government "lim ited to the status quo," supporting colonialism and taking no action to end poverty. Euro­ peans, too, felt that food, trade, and monetary authorities, sufficient to prevent economic collapse, were part o f the "revolutionary ideal.” As for Russia, few Europeans believed the Soviet Union would start a w ar in the next few years, though the Politburo would probably continue its ideological campaign to establish a "W orld Soviet Union through the collapse o f the W est" The only hope, then, was a union o f the W est, whose "harsh logic” (power) would “evoke” participation from the East.”

Mortfraux Dodaration On the sixth day, British M.P. V ictor Collins presented the general resolu­ tion that his committee (W offord and W ynner in the drafting stage) had prepared and that became known as the "M ontreux Declaration." Considering the confu­ sion, the leadership crises, the organizational competition, and the cranks who interrupted the deliberations on every occasion to present their pet projects for saving the world, it was a remarkably judicious docum ent (For full te x t see Appendix F.) The M ontreux Declaration appealed to the peoples o f the world "w hile the nations waste their substance in preparing to destroy each other”:* We world federalists are convinced that the establishment of a World Federal Government is the crucial problem of our time. Until it is solved, all other issues, whether national or international, will remain unsettled. It is not be­ tween free enterprise and planned economy, nor between capitalism and communism, that the choice lies, but between federalism and power politics. Federalism alone can assure the survival of man.

Six "principles” o f federalism were cited: universal state membership, lim i­ tation o f national sovereignty, world law enforced on the individual, supranatiooal armed forces and national disarmament, international control of atomic energy, ” Hams Wofford, “Montreux,” Common Cause, 1 (November 1947): 161-62. N WMWFG, “Montreux Declaration,” 25 August 1947, Schwimmer-Lloyd Collec­ tion; “Federalists Propose Stronger U.N. to Rule,” New York Times, 4 September 1947, p. 6. Some predicted that the Montreux declaration would one day be as famous as the Declaration of Independence. Sally Trope, “M obilization of the Peoples,” Orlando (Florida) Morning Sentinel, 5 September 1947.

İh» Gusadn end the World Movement


and world taxation. Two approaches were also given: U N . refoim and a peo­ ples’ convention in 1950. The emphasis was on fast action. The congress rapidly dien wound up its affairs. Jean Laimeroux was elected president V ice-presidents-elect were Edward Clark (U.S.A.), Henrik Brugmans (Netherlands), Ugo Damiani (Italy), Victor Collins (Britain), and Edith W ynner (U.S.A .). The council o f 20 (maximum 50) included Ota Adler, Fred Carney, Frances Josephy, Henri Koch, Rev. Gordon Lang, Alexandre Marc, H att Olsen, Abbé G rouès-Pierre, Lt.Coi. Sarrazac-Soulage, Henry Usbome, M onica W ing­ ate, and H arris W offord. Tom Griessemer remained as secretary-general. O f the council, an executive committee o f 9 planned to m eet every two or three months and had effective direction of the movement: all but two o f the committee were Europeans.11 Proposals for the propaganda departm ent were brought out o f com m ittee. The students announced the formation erf W orld Student Federalists. Vital finan­ cial contributions were made, including 30,000 francs to the students and as much to the adults. A Scandinavian resolution of immense significance, though it w as lost in the rush to adjourn, called upon the Worid M ovement to transform itself from an association o f sovereign organizations into a federation deriving its strength from individual members (an issue that would rend the W orid M ove­ m ent in 1949 and is not settled to this day). A Frenchwoman issued a ringing appeal to women on behalf o f worid governm ent Resistance hero Abbé Pierre issued an even more ringing one to the citizens o f the world.”

AbbéPIwr» The arrival o f Abbé Pierre (nom de guerre o f Abbé Henri Grouès-Pierre) had been one o f the greatest surprises o f the congress. M an o f God, decorated Re­ sistance hero (he once carried on his back the paralyzed Jacques de Gaulle, brother o f the general, into Switzerland when pursued by the G estapo), protector o f Jew s, defender o f laborers in the Underground—he was respected by both Gaullists and Communists. Pierre became delegate to the French Constituent Assem­ bly in 1945 and thereafter member of the National Assembly from M eurthe-etM oselle. He so im pressed the M ontreux congress with his immediate under­ standing o f die ideal o f federalism, his selflessness, and his courage that (though he was not an official representative of any federalist organization) he was elected vice-chairm an o f the continuing executive committee. When Gordon Lang with­ drew , Abbé Pierre then became acting chairman during the crucial first year o f the W orld M ovem ent”

11 Minutes, Montreux Congress, p. 23; Statutes of the WMWFG, n.d., post 25 Au­ gust 1947, World Republic Papers. n Minutes, Montreux Congress, pp. 16-22. N Jack W. Grove, “Student Federalists at Montreux," Federal News, October 1947, pp. 12-13; Fred Camey, “The Faith of Abbé Piene." World Government News, De­ cember 1948, pp. 16-19.



Analysis of lh« Montreux Congress: Lock of Ideological Preparation Evaluations o f the M ontreux congress generally found the organization faulty, the leadership lacking, but the spirit prophetic. How could a movement to unite the world impress people or statesmen when it could not even unite it­ self? The confederal organization of the W orld M ovement was the first reason for its subsequent ineffectiveness. But this defect in turn had causes. Harris W offord blamed poor ideological preparation. M ost federalists’ idea o f world government derived, he observed, from Clarence Streit’s Union Now, Emery Ro­ ves’ Anatom y o f Peace, the American monthly World Government News, and the British Federal Union News. How could federalists on so slight a basis, W offord asked, compete with Communists, who spent years in M arxist study groups, or with W estern state departments and foreign offices, which maintained large research and propaganda divisions to wage the ideological battle for the minds of men? The movement needed an equivalent “ideological foundation.” Reasoning like this led to the Foundation for W orld Government next year.14*

Lode of Leadership W offord also criticized the lack of leadership. Everyone was sincere, the M.P.S—Usbome especially—were intelligent and able, the students had initia­ tive and energy. “The fact remains, however, that the casual observer a t M on­ treux would have dismissed the Congress as just another frustrated world-saving outfit without the leadership necessary for the increasingly difficult job o f saving the world.” The importance o f leadership was dem onstrated next year when Churchill quickly created a rival movement for European union. The cause, in turn, W offord found in “the despair which is settling in all over the continent as the drift toward war gains momentum and the people find them­ selves hopelessly caught between Russia and America.” Sincere, idealistic, in­ telligent people despaired o f politics and were leaving it to opportunists and ex­ trem ists, demagogues, nationalists, and Communists.” The Dane Anker Kirkeby also noted the “superannuated politicians” and “cantankerous persons” who tested the conference. “But here also idealism shines and genius sparkles,” be ad­ ded. “In a way this international gathering is a characteristic profile o f mankind.”1* M ary M averick Lloyd concluded: “It was neither a mannerly nor an orderly congress at the outset but no one who ’fought the battle o f M ontreux’ would willingly have missed it. No one who was there could fail to recognize the vi­ tality and devotion behind all the fireworks.”17

MHarris Wofford, “Montreux,” Common Cause, 1 (November 1947): 163. "Ibid. “ Elizabeth Nordentoft, Historien om Een Verden, 20; quoted by Finn Launen, Federalism and World Order, D: 33. ” Mary Maverick Lloyd, “Montreux World Congress,” World Federation—Now, November 1947, p. 3.

Th « Guşada and th* World Movwrwnt


Ladtof Mon»y The subsequent history o f the W orld M ovement also gives us a basis for evaluating M ontreux. The organization had an uphill struggle to live up to the grandeur o f its name. The first problem was money. Griessemer, Schultz, and C lark estim ated they would need $40,000 for the first year, but after four months they had been able to raise only a quarter of that am ount This meant they could not hire headquarters staff, everybody was overworked, outreach suffered, tempers flared, and steadily the lack o f means to effect their desperate ends worked its cor­ rosive influence. The only office was Griessemer’s at 10 rue Diday in Geneva. W hen he returned to New York, Larmeroux found space in Paris. Henri Koch, head o f the propaganda departm ent was the only fulltim e employee. He printed and distributed about 15,000 copies o f the M ontreux declaration in French and English, 4,000 o f the statutes, and 1,000 of the report on M ontreux.1*

Shcdow Popular Strength The next problem was organization in accordance with the statutes. Here the confederal nature o f the W orld Movement, though it could not have been avoided at the stage o f federalist development in 1947, proved its weakness. By Decem­ ber, only 15 organizations (of the 51 that attended at M ontreux and another 49 that Griesscm er invited) had formally joined, paying their dues o f 100 per mem­ ber. The slow response contributed to the financial problem and also revealed the shallow political strength of federalism. W orld Student Federalists, for in­ stance, despite the enthusiasm o f youth, was little more than an office in Paris leased by Larmeroux, meagerly equipped, and staffed by volunteers. By January 1948, even this was lost. The student movement reverted to the group centered around Fred Carney, Trudy Schneider, and Norman Hart in London. They set them selves the task of organizing a formal founding convention for W orld Stud­ en t Federalists at Hastings, England, in the sum m »' of 1948.”

World Unresporalv» to Idea of Föderation The great problem, tending to include in it the problems o f leadership and approaches, was the political condition o f Europe and generally o f the world, w hich was unresponsive to the idea of world federation. Some trips of W orld M ovement leaders in 1947 and 1948 were revealing. Jean Larmeroux and Henri Koch, in October 1947, traveled to Luxembourg, Belgium, and Holland, where they m et the press and were interviewed on radio (plans were to establish a world press and radio committee). They also m et parliamentarians in the three coun­ tries w ith such success (the chairman of the Commons in Luxembourg and the chairm an o f the Senate in Holland were leaders of federalist groups) that a whole new approach—the “parliamentary approach”—dawned on Larmeroux as an alter­ " Brief Summary of HQ Activities since the Montreux Convention, 23 December 1947, pp. 1-2, World Republic Papers. * Carney to World Republic. 16 January 1948, World Republic Papers; Minutes, Executive Committee, WMWFG, 12 May 1948, ibid.



native to Usborne’s plan, for which Lanneroux had not found much support.4* The idea was to convene federalist parliam entarians from throughout the world, draft a motion calling for a world constituent assembly, then subm it it officially to the parliaments. This third approach (after U Ji. reform and the peo­ ples’ convention) was approved by the executive committee on its own authori­ ty, which caused some dismay among Usbom e’s co-workers, Edith W ynner in particular. The basic practicality of the approach, however, recommended it, and it has continued to inspire parliamentarians for world order to this day.4'

Communist Opposition in CzndtosbvcMa Abbé Pierre, in late November 1947, traveled to Prague to inquire whether it m ight be possible to hold the W orld M ovem ent's next convention in Czechoslo­ vakia. He found tim e a group of about 30 engineers, lawyers, and businessmen interested in world governm ent This group bad been formed by the Czech stud­ ents who returned from M ontreux. The group m et from time to time, was ad­ dressed by Edith W ynner and by Peter Krehel (who brought a copy of the Chica­ go committee’s Preliminary D raft o f a World Constitution), wrote reviews o f a Czech translation o f Emery Reves’ The Anatom y o f Peace, tried to speak to President Benes, and about the time o f Pierre’s visit was requesting legal status from the M inistry of Interior. Pierre him self spoke to churchmen and some high officials in Benes’s Government, who were walking a m ost tense high w ire in the Cold W ar. He came away thinking a federalist convention was “not impos­ sible.’’ Pierre went immediately to Geneva to attend m eetings o f the U.N. Hu­ man Rights Commission, where be m et Eleanor Roosevelt and spoke about world government on Swiss radio. He then returned to Paris, where he inter­ viewed the Russian ambassador, Bogomolev, about a possible trip to Moscow.41 It would be going much too far to speculate that the world government move­ m ent precipitated the Communist party coup that overtook Czechoslovakia in February 1948, but its contacts m ust have been part o f the liberalization that Moscow feared. A fter the coup, the Prague group never m et again, and “world government’’ was no longer heard in student discussions at the university. The Party condemned talk o f allying Czechoslovakia with any “W estern-sponsored” European federation as “treasonable,’’ since it alienated the country from the So­ viet Union and the “Slav people’s democratic states.”414*1 44 An Interview with Monsieur Jean Lanneroux, Radio Brussels, 16 October 1947; Extrait d ’un rapport envoyé par l ’Union Fédéral Luxembourgeoise, 11 October 1947; Extrait d ’un rapport envoyé par la Rassemblement Fédéraliste Belge, 13-14 October 1947, World Republic Papers. 41 Minutes, Executive Committee, WMWFG, 12-14 November 1947, p. 4, UWF Papers, 18; Wynner to Marc, 11 February 1948, Schwimmer-Lloyd Collection. 41 Brief Summary of HQ Activities, p. 3; Interview de M. l’Abbé Orouès-Pierre, Radio Genève, n.d., c. 1 December 1947, World Republic Papers; Edith Wynner in Prague, October 1947, Schwimmer-Lloyd Collection; Peter Krehel, “Report from Central and Eastern Europe,” Common Cause, 2 (November 1948): 133-35. 44 Ibid.

İh » Crusod® and the World Movement


Spraadng the Word of Montreux M eanwhile, Henry Usborne traveled to the United States. He spent all o f O ctober 1947 on a continental tour, visiting New York, Princeton, W ashington, D .C ., Chicago, Oak Ridge, S t Louis, Cleveland, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and New York again. He spoke 28 times to audiences o f 40 to 1,000 and spoke (xi the radio, to world federalists, atomic scientists, councils o f foreign relations, students, and the public about world government and his plan to bold a people’s convention in Geneva by 1950. U sbom e’s basic speech was a warning o f coming war, in a pattern often found at the beginning o f federalist and peace movements. His operative line was the usual scare tactic that Europe was on the verge of a “shooting war this winter.” He surveyed the drift toward war and criticized the two trends o f Ameri­ can thought as perceived in Europe—that “the price o f peace can be paid in dol­ lars” (M arshall plan) or that “the price of peace is power” (rearmament). On the contrary, he stated, “The price o f peace is justice. In practice, there is no peace without law.” The speech concluded with arguments for world governm ent Usbocne sketched his plan and concluded with a hope that one-fourth o f the Ameri­ can population, like the British, would go to the polls and vote for delegates to a w orld constitutional convention.44

H MBon for World Government U sborne’s tour was arranged in great haste after Montreux, but it had impor­ tant im plications for the world governm ent movement. In the first place, it m arked the point when M rs. Anita McCormick Blaine, elderly heiress o f the im­ m ense M cCormick reaper fortune, became interested in making a m ajor contri­ bution to the movement. She m et Usbome in Chicago, was im pressed, and asked him simply bow much money he would need to achieve world govern­ m e n t The poor man hardly knew to whom he was speaking and thought only o f paying for his current trip. “$5,000,” he suggested. M rs. Blaine ju st sm iled and took him for a fool. W ynner never forgave the British leader for this false s ta rt but together they laid the most gracious siege to the old lady, and a year later, when H arris W offord and Stringfellow Barr got into the a c t M rs. Blaine did give $1 m illion to the people’s convention.4134*

“ Fyke Fanner, Information on U.S. World Government Tour of Henry C. Us­ bome, 20 September 1947, University of Chicago, Committee to Frame a World Constitution (CFWC) Papers. 30.1: Minutes. Council of WMWFG, January 1948, cited by Launen; Henry C. Usbome, “The Crusade for World Government,” Address to Oak Ridge scientists. Bulletin o f the Atomic Scientists, 3 (December 1947): 359-60. 43 W ynner to Usborne, 12 November 1947, ibid.; Usbome to Wynner, 15 Decem­ ber 1947, ibid., T64; Wynner to Wofford, 19 January 1948, ibid., T63. Blaine also paid Usboroe’s 1947 trip expenses, at least indirectly. She gave $5,000 to Farmer to cany the proposal of world government to Stalin, but when that fell through Farmer contributed what was left ($3,500) to Usborne. The Emergency Committee of the Atomic Scientists contributed another $3.000.



Bulking tho American Movement In the second place, the tour was successful in tallying behind the Usborne banner the Chicago Committee to Frame a W orld Constitution (despite G. A. Borgese’s sniping criticism in Common Cause). It also interested Harrison Brown and the atomic scientists and all those, including at the tim e Alan Cran­ ston, who were restive in United W orld Federalists under Cord M eyer’s U.N. re­ form regime. H arris W offord foresaw two world government movements in the U nited States. He calculated the chances of getting Robert M. Hutchins or even Dwight D. Eisenhower (“Ike is the only man who could rouse masses”) to lead the American wing of Usbome’s crusade. Ike was the order o f leader needed for the great project. The result was an active, if small, movement that culminated in the Pocono conference of m id-1948, followed by limited federalist participation in the abortive presidential campaign of Henry W allace in the fall o f 1948.* *

Nehni for World Government? Back in England, Usbome continued to put his crusade in place. He began to make a dent in British public opinion, notably in late 1947 in a debate with the popular C.E.M . Joad at the University o f Cambridge’s Union. (British politi­ cians watch the Union for signs of changing public opinion.) Joad first spoke pessim istically about world government as necessary for survival and beneficial for mankind but impossible to g e t Usborne then followed w ith his practical plan, and the audience cheered.47 The English leader made more trips abroad to preach the crusade, as in France4* and Scandinavia.4* Abbé Pierre traveled to Rome at the beginning o f the year, but he found that the Italian federalist movement had all but m elted away in the internal struggle with the Communist party. Accordingly, the W orld M ovement decided to hold its 1948 convention in Luxembourg again , where Lanneroux and Koch had found their greatest support. Headquarters con­ centrated on arranging a convention that would bring money and numbers into the movement.50 One trip that did reach a remaining comer of the world was Edward Clark’s to the Near, M iddle, and Far East. He visited Greece (“the nut in the nutcrackers”), Turkey, Lebanon, Egypt (where he found The Anatomy o f Peace translated into “ Wofford to Usbome, 24 January 1947, ibid., T64. n Carney to World Republic, 12 December 1947, World Republic Papers. * Usborne-Sairazac Agreement, Elections for the World Constituent Assembly, 25 September 1947. Schwimmer-Uoyd Collection, T64. The French National As­ sembly at this time had, in addition to Pierre, 51 federalist members. WMWFG, Membres Fédéralistes de TAssemblée Nationale, n.d., post 12 March 1948, UWF Pa­ pers, 18. * Edith Wynner, People’s World Constitutional Convention, Preliminary Report on Scandinavia, 8 March 1948. Schwimmer-Lloyd Collection, T64. * “W.M.W.F.G. Council Member Sees Pope,” Federal News, August 1948, p. 6; Carney to World Republic, 16 January 1948, World Republic Papers.

Th» ûusode and th e World M ovement


A rabie), India, China, and Japan. In India, two months after Gandhi’s death, C lark had a substantial interview with Jawaharlal Nehru, who came out publicly thereafter in favor of world governm ent Nehru’s messages were interpreted by U sborne as evidence of the highest ranking national politician who m ight offer leadership of the world government m ovem ent”

M“John Appleseed,” World Government News, June 1948, 10; Nehru to Clark, 16 A pril 1948, UWF Papers, 26; Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, “Gandhi’s Teaching and World G overnm ent” University of Chicago's Round Table of the Air, 4 April 1948, Com­ m on Cause, 4 (March 1951): 398-99.

17 Cord Meyer: Mainstream World Federalism During the war it was demonstrated that international unity of purpose and execution could be attained, without jeopardy to any nation's independence, if all were willing to pool a portion of their authority in a single headquarters with power to enforce their decisions. In the formation of the new United Na­ tions and of the Allied organization for the control of Germany, this lesson had not yet been accepted. Its application would have meant some form of limited, federated world government, which, while conforming to the West­ ern Allies’ battle-front experience as providing the only sure way to success, was politically unacceptable to any of the great nations concerned. —Dwight D. Eisenhower, Crusade in Europe (1948), pp. 459, 476-77 History is now choosing the Founding Fathers of the World Republic. He who could be one of that group, and does not seek to be, has lost the noblest opportunity of a lifetime. —Carl Van Doren, author of The Great Rehearsal (1948), attributed

Rb« of United World Fadaraftsts

ih e policies o f the Cold W ar had been chosen, but there was still a popular opposition. Through 1947, despite the discouragements o f the Truman doctrine, the containm ent policy, and the collapse o f negotiations to establish the interna­ tional control of atomic energy, United W orld Federalists (UWF), organized at A sheville in February, rapidly became the leading, mass-membership, political action organization working in the United States for the establishm ent o f world federal governm ent One of its vice-presidents, Grenville Clark, proposed a gen­ eral East-W est settlement in early 1948, which effectively presented the federalist alternative to the Cold W ar, as did hearings in die U.S. House cm federalist reso­ lutions. UWF’s aim , according to a political action manual distributed to its state branches and local chapters, was to “elect in this country a [national] government that w ill put out its full efforts to get world government,” Its methods were those o f sim ilar pressure groups in American electoral politics: organizing com­ m ittees and chapters, writing letters, collecting signatures to petitions, distribut-



ing educational literature, bolding public meetings and mass rallies, cooperating with other organizations, sending delegations to officials, lobbying with repre­ sentatives, putting referenda on the ballot, preparing resolutions for legislation, testifying at congressional bearings, bringing the issues before party conventions and campaigns, and supporting candidates for office who had declared themselves in favor of world government. UWF was never a political party, though that was a hope o f some of the more radical young members of Student Federalists, who were merged into the larger organization as the Student Division. UWF remained a non-partisan, conserva­ tive, profoundly critical pressure group in the mainstream o f American politics. By the time of its first annual convention in St. Louis, M issouri, on 1-2 Novem­ ber 1947, UWF had weathered its start-up problems, had a firm membership o f 16,000 in 17 branches and 315 chapters, and proposed a budget for 1948 o f $500,000.'

GardMayor Jr. M uch of the credit went to UWF’s young (26), able, well-connected, and very effective new president, Cord M eyer Jr. M eyer had been Commander Harold Stassen’s aide at the San Francisco conference to complete the drafting o f the U.N. Charter in 1945. He had served with the 22nd Marine Regiment in the as­ saults on Eniwetok and Guam, where he was wounded in the face by a Japanese hand grenade and lost an eye. He received the Bronze Star for gallantry in action and was retired a captain. Some vivid wartime letters of his published in the Atlantic in 1944 brought him to the attention of Stassen. After the San Francis­ co conference, M eyer published an article on the inadequacies of the U.N. Char­ ter, from which we have already quoted, and he published several more, estab­ lishing him self as an informed and mature advocate of world governm ent2 As a wounded veteran and an advocate o f world legal institutions to prevent another war, he possessed a peculiar personal authority, which many perceived on contact with him. “That young man has the best mind,” Stassen once said, “of any young man in America.” M eyer was invited to the Dublin conference o f late 1945. His logic and seriousness impressed such leading internationalists as G renville Clark, Thomas K. Finletter, Norman Cousins, and Emery Reves. He made sim ilar impressions at the Rollins College conference o f early 1946. The pattern became a kind o f legend: Some very im portant person w ould m eet him, think he was a bright young man who ought to get on in the world, then suggest another im portant person be should meet. Through such connec-1* 1 “Political Action for United World Federalists,” n.d., c. February 1948, Riorden Papers; Wofford to Swing, 11 March 1947, Regenstein Library, World Republic Pa­ pers; Cord Meyer Jr., Quarterly Report, 1 September-31 December 1947, Lilly Li­ brary, UWF Papers, 42. 1Cord Meyer Jr., “On the Beaches,” Atlantic, October 1944; “A Serviceman Looks at the Peace,” ibid., September 1945; “What Does the Future Hold for Us?” Vogue, February 1946; “Stopping the Atomic Armament Race,” Atlantic, July 1946; “Insti­ tutions and Men,” Nation, 8 March 1947.

GordMoyur: AteM raom World FMcralsm


firms, M eyer became a board member of Americans United for W orld Govern­ m ent, W orld Federalists, U.S.A., the M assachusetts Committee for W orld Fed­ eration, and Student Federalists—the constituait organizations of United W orld Federalists. He also became a m em ba o f the national planning committee o f the new American Veterans Committee, where he was instrum ental in setting the policy o f this rival o f the American Legion and the Veterans of Foreign Wars in favor o f world government.1 Hence, it was natural for the executive council o f UWF in M ay 1947 to choose M eyer for their president. Someone objected that he was perhaps too young and inexperienced to take on die presidency o f an organization aiming to m ove the U nited States and then the whole world toward the establishm ent o f w orld government. To this the New York attorney and later popular UWF par­ liam entarian A.J.G. Priest replied: ‘T o o young! May I point out that Hamil­ ton, Jefferson, and Madison did their best work before they reached their thirties. I know this young man well. D espite my age, I know that I and others here would all be honored to make Cord M eyer our leader and to follow him ."* 4*

Moya's LaadonNp of UWF As a young executive at UWF headquarters in New York, M eyer was unspar­ ing o f him self, exacting o f others. He made about 200 speaking engagements all o v a the country (his asking fee was $150, but he often took less, $75 or $50, all turned o v a to UWF). W hen he was in town, his secretary gave him three or four appointm ents each day—fund raising meetings, interview s, talks w ith casual acquaintances m et on his trips—and Cord, who n e v a insisted that callers come to him, would go uncomplaining to whatever address she gave him. B ack in the office, young M eyer saw a constant traffic of staffers go by his desk. He personally approved every plan and publicity release to go out from headquarters. A policy speech took him about the same time as a courtesy note. He never indulged in social lunches, reserving that time for business, and usually the cocktail hour, too. He was an excellent parliamentarian. S a n e who worked u n d a him found him cold, even "Prussian," but there can be no doubt that C o d M eyer was a resourceful, courageous, and persuasive leader o f the movement, sincerely devoted to the cause of limited world government. “Your contribution to our conference last Saturday," wrote one listener, “has produced many com­ m ents appreciative of both the m an n a and the m a tta of your talk. W e are

’ Cord Meyer Jr., “The Search for Security,” Address to United World Federalists and the Federation of American Scientists, Washington, DC, 19 April 1947, reprinted in the Congressional Record, 14 May 1947, 93: 5310-12; Constitution of the Ameri­ can Veterans Committee, Inc., adopted at Des Moines, 14-16 June 1946, UWF Pa­ pers, 9. 4 Croswell Bowen, “Young Man in Quest of Peace,” PM, Sunday Magazine, June 1947.



grateful."1 W hat about Russia? Even before the UWF council elected M eyer as president to "run the show,” as A J.G . Priest put it (Upsur Evans, a young G ulf Oil executive, was chosen as executive director to "run the shop”), it had to respond to the Truman doctrine, which it did by sending telegrams to key senators protesting evasion o f the U.N. It also had to find an answer to the question everybody was asking advocates o f world government: "W hat about Russia?” Norman Cousins, editor o f the Satur­ day Review, argued, “W e m ust not duck the most important single question be­ ing asked today in connection with Federal W orld G overnm ent” W. T. Holliday, president o f Standard Oil o f Ohio, found that speakers like him self on world government covered only half the subject if they did not answer the popular im­ pression and argument o f the State Department that "it is hopeless to strive for world law and order because o f Russia’s attitude." Vernon Nash, the dynamic speaker and field-w orker who was bringing many new chapters weekly into the movement, insisted an answer was needed to break the "menial stymie” that was keeping many people inactive.* In the drafting o f the policy statements on Russia many participated, includ­ ing Nash, Thomas Mahony, Student Federalists, and Grenville Clark. Clark did not think that Russian ratification of a sincere and fair plan was hopeless:7 It must be remembered that Russia has never been presented with a compre­ hensive set of amendments representing the consensus of opinion of the rest of the world. Especially, there has never been proposed to Russia a fair plan of balanced representation in a strengthened General Assembly. Such a plan would necessarily take account of influence in the world, natural and industri­ al resources, literacy, population and other related factors. Under an equitable plan, Russia’s voting power in the General Assembly, as that of the United States and other strong countries, would largely increase, and this might well furnish a consideration for the abrogation of the present veto power in the Security Council.

Unity and Dtvorsify The upshot was a major new policy statement, "Unity and Diversity,” which supplemented and clarified UWF’s statement at Asheville, "Beliefs and Purposes.” 1 Muriel Stamper to Frank Campion, 20 February 1948, UWF Papers, 33; Annalee Jacoby, ‘Too Early, Too Late—Or Soon?” World Government News, Septem ber 1948, pp. 13-21; Shane Riorden to Author, Interview, 1 March 1981; Richard R. Wood, Friends Peace Committee, to Meyer, 6 October 1947, UWF Papers, 32. ‘ Vernon Nash, A Proposed Policy Statement Mentioning Russia by Name; A Poli­ cy Proposal State Entirely in General Terms, n.d., post 20 April 1947, UWF Papers, 57; Nash, Tentative Draft, n.d., post 20 April 1947, ibid., 60. ' Grenville Clark, Suggested Form of a Statement by United World Federalists..., 13 May 1947, UWF Papers, 33; Thomas H. Mahony, The Soviet Union and World Federation, n.d., post 20 April 1947, ibid., 37.

Cord Mayor: Mdnstream World Fèdarcism


The new statem ent, which was offered only as guidance and not binding since it had not yet been approved by the whole membership in convention, aimed to dispel doubts w ithout suppressing diversity. Both the United States and the So­ viet Union were recognized as opponents to world government. Emphasis was placed on the special responsibility o f American citizens to take the lead:' The United States and the Soviet Union are now the main obstacles to the coming of federal world government. The immediate job of United World Federalists, as Americans, is to mobilize public opinion in our own country sufficiently to produce leadership by the American government in the trans­ formation of the United Nations into a federal world government

The universality o f the goal was reaffirmed, the possibility c i Russian partic­ ipation after a fair official proposal affirmed, and the preferability of starting even with a partial federation, provided that the door never be closed to outside states, rather that continuing with the impotent United N ations was announced. The precedent of the U.S. and other originally partial federations was cited. But “uni­ versal membership“ remained the goal. Another section on the United Nations argued that its agencies, though they deserved support, could not be expected to “prevent a steady worsening o f world conditions so long as international rela­ tions are poisoned by competitive national armaments and the fear of imminent war.“ Only weald government, it was asserted, could perform the functions of the U nited Nations. W orld law was prerequisite to the formation of world com­ m unity.* *

Tasting tha PoMcol Winds W ith their policy set and a president at the helm, United W orld Federalists sought w hat political winds existed to carry their people toward world govern­ m en t Lack o f funds was the first problem. There was talk o f an $80,000 budget to support their projects until their first convention. Eventually the organization had to m ake do on about half o f this. By October 1947, UWF was $14,000 in debt; by November, $26,000. M eyer led the staff in reducing his own salary (from $13,000 to $8,500). A mailing of 2,200 letters to raise funds generated a response o f only 110 (5 percent.) Plans to dramatize the movement with an original film by Pare Lorentz came to grief as cost estim ates rose to $40,000. Lorentz was the acclaimed filmmaker whose documentaries, The Plow That Broke the Plains (1936), The River (1937), and The Fight fo r Life (1940) bad had a powerful effect on social change. The Chicago Com m ittee to Frame a W orld Constitution got involved in a dispute w ith UWF about the political line (minimalism or maximalism) erf the proposed • “Unity and Diversity,” n.d., c. 14 June 1947, World Republic Papers. * Policy Statement No. 5, What about the Baruch Plan? n.d., ante 14 June 1947, UWF Papers, 43; Policy Statement No. 4; UWF Attitude toward a United States of Eu­ rope and Other Regional Federations, n.d., ante 14 June 1947, World Republic Pa­ pers; Minutes of Executive Council, 14 June 1947, UWF Papers, 43.



film on w orld government, but there was never enough money. Eventually MOM produced a pared down version, The Beginning or the End (produced by Sam M arx, 1947), a Hollywood re-enactm ent o f the M anhattan project ending with the dropping of the atomic bomb on Hiroshima.10 M embership was growing with disappointing slowness. A ctually by N o­ vember 1947, UWF bad fewer known members than the claimed figures at Ashe­ ville. About 140 delegates were expected at S t Louis. W orld Republic, which remained vocal on the peoples’ convention approach, definitely withdrew. World Government News continued to hoe its own row. Its sturdy independence and inclusiveness, m ost members thought, were a strength, but UWF leadership wanted a house organ. N ot to have an organizational newspaper was thought to be foolish. The leadership settled for an insert in World Government News, but the conflict would not die.“

Imporiolsmand Dotwreno» Opposed to World Government By 1947, UWF was sailing against headwinds advocating the open practice o f power politics. This point of view was forcefully expressed in the disillusioned Trotskyite Jam es B urnham 's anti-w orld government book published in early 1947, The Struggle fo r the World. Burnham argued vigorously that the United States should aim to establish an American empire over the globe, since the So­ viet Union seemed to be pursuing a Soviet empire. He was quite sanguine that a third world war should be fought to achieve such a purpose. In fact, he believed the third world war was already und » way, begun in an obscure Greek meeting in


The United States is not going to stop the war by wishing for peace. It is un­ likely that this war can be stopped in any case. The only chance of stopping it is by carrying through a policy the fulfillment of which would remove the causes of this w ar.... If war nevertheless comes quickly, there is less reason for the United States to fear it in conjunction with a policy that is certain to improve the relative position of the United States, than there is to fear a la t» war which would begin with atomic weapons on the other side, and the United States’ position sapped perhaps beyond repair by the results of a false policy.

This was perhaps the m ost extreme statement of the time in favor o f preven­ tive war. At a time when John H ersey's Hiroshima was going unsold in book­ stores, Burnham 's Struggle fo r the World got on two national best-sellers lists. It was featured in two issues o f Life and reprinted in pari in the American M er­ cury and The Commonweal It was very widely reviewed, if almost always with doubt and rejection. M ildred Blake in little World Government News answered Burnham’s charge that there was “no sentiment toward surrender o f sovereignty on the part o f any U N . member." She recounted ju st such expressions by Chi'* Minutes of Executive Council and Committee, 1947, UWF Papers, 43 and 60. “ Ibid. u James Burnham, The Struggle fo r the World (New York: John Day, 1947), 1, 224-25, passim.

CcrdM oyor MdralracmW oridFadaralsm


na, B ritain’s Ernest Bevin and Anthony Eden, the French constitution, and repre­ sentatives o f Canada, Belgium, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Cuba, and the Philippines.11 B ut Burnham gave clear, unequivocal expression to what many in public w ere thinking. The book remains to this day a monument to ideas o f absolute national sovereignty carried to their extreme in a bipolar world armed with ato­ m ic weapons. Burnham m aintained that an American atomic monopoly would be the best guarantee to the rest o f the world that the Bomb would not again be used. It was the best substitute for world government, be argued, which the peo­ ple o f the world showed no readiness to establish. This kind of thinking places Burnham with Bernard Brodie as an architect of deterrence theory.14

Stores, Latadan, and Pubic OpHon In Favor of World Government However, there were trends in UWF’s favor. In March 1947, the M assachu­ setts legislature passed a strong world government resolution, which had been introduced after the successful referendum in 1946.15 In April, Norwalk, Con­ necticut, following a speech by Norman Cousins and a drive organized by the high school principal and supported by the mayor and leaders of the churches, business, and labor, completed a surprising campaign in which 17,000 citizens out o f a population o f 42,000 signed a petition in favor of a strengthened U.N. Both world government and U.N. groups claimed c re d it1* Sim ilar petition cam­ paigns took place during the year in Pelham, New York, Sauk Center, M inneso­ ta, Princeton, New Jersey, and Scarsdale, New York. In May 1947, M issouri becam e the 15th state to pass the Humber resolution on world federation. S t Louis’s Plaza Bank president F. R. von W indegger, who hosted the M idwestern Conference on W orld Federation the previous month, was its moving sp irit He led a delegation that called upon President Truman in July. Sim ilar resolutions w ere planned in C onnecticut Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Maine, and W isconsin.17 O ne o f Cord M eyer’s first projects was to assemble an advisory board o f rep­ utable persons (all acceptance m eant was use o f their names) in order to lend greater prestige to United W orld Federalists. He looked for known international­ ists and w as particularly interested in high business, labor, and church leaders.

» ‘‘Books and Publications,” World Government News, May 1947, pp. 10-12. MCommon Cause, 1 (July 1947): 33; Bernard Brodie, ed., The Absolute Weapon: Atomic Power and World Order (New York: Haicourt Brace, 1946). ° “Bay State Hearing,” World Government News, March 1947, pp. 10-11; “Rising Tide,” ibid., April 1947, p. 2. “ “Grassroots,” ibid., April 1947, p. 4; “Norwalk Plan,” ibid., May 1947, p. 2; "Norwalk Gives a Lead,” United Nations World, June 1947, p. 18; Common Came, 1 (February 1948): 311. ” “Humber’s Fifteenth,” World Government News, June 1947, p. 3; “Men from M issouri,” ibid., July 1947, p. 2; “Rising Tide,” ibid., April 1947, p. 2.



He quickly won acceptances Croat an impressive list:1* Charles Boité, chairman, American Veterans Committee; Henry B. Cabot, New England industrialist; James B. Carey, secretary-treasurer. Congress of Industrial Organizations; Rev. Edward A. Conway, Jesuit educator; Edison Dick, vice-president, A. B. Dick Co. Justice William O. Douglas; Albert Einstein, Institute for Advanced Study; Dr. Frank P. Graham, president, University of North Carolina; Rt. Rev. Henry W. Hobson, Episcopal bishop; Hamilton Holt, founder of League to Enforce Peace; Mrs. Robert Lehman, civic leader; Rabbi Joshua Loth Liebman, Temple Israel, Boston; James B. Patton, president. National Farmers Union; Prof. Frederick L. Schuman, legal scholar, Williams College; Rt. Rev. Bernard J. Sheil, Catholic bishop; Jeny Voorhis, executive secretary, Cooperative League; Byrl A. Whitney, educational director. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen; Judge Robert N. Wilkin, U.S. District Court, Ohio.

A fter a jo in t Einstein-Sw ing-M eyer radio broadcast in July, the public seemed to take notice. Resolutions in favor of world government were being passed by such national organizations as:1* National Educational Association, U.S. Junior Chamber of Commerce, Emergency Committee of the Atomic Scientists. American Veterans Committee, Americans for Democratic Action, National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, Church of the Brethren, Protestant Episcopal Church, Catholic Association for International Peace, Fellowship of Reconciliation, Methodist Commission on World Peace. " Minutes of Executive Committee, 10 July and 20 August 1947; UWF Letterhead, UWF Papers, 60. Some who declined to lend their names to the advisory board, like Representative Walter H. Judd or columnist Thomas L. Stokes, argued they would be more effective on behalf of world government if they maintained a public pose of in­ dependence. Owen D. Young felt world government was a task for the younger gener­ ation. Many pleaded pressure of work. 1.1. Rabi needed to get reestablished in his scientific pursuits. UWF Papers, 42. ” Albert Einstein, Raymond Gram Swing, and Cord Meyer Jr., 'T h e Immediate Need for World Law,” ABC Broadcast, 17 July 1947, Committee to Frame a World Constitution (CFWC) Papers, 24.5; “Resolutions,” World Government News, August 1947, p. 4; “Helping Hands,” ibid., September 1947, p. 7; UWF, “Memo to the Unit­ ed Nations,” n.d., c. 25 September 1947, Benedict Papers.

CordM uyer: MoinsfrecmWorldFederolsm


Local organizations also did so, such as the Orlando-W inter Park (Florida) Uni­ tarian W omen’s Alliance and the Renovo (Pennsylvania) Rotary Club. New polls favoring world government were cited, including a Gallup poll of 15 September 1947, in which 56 percent agreed that “the U.N. should be strength­ ened to make it a world government,” and 83 percent that “a world conference should be called to work out plans for making the U.N. stronger.” By Septem­ ber, the tide bad turned for UWF memberships; 6,500 people joined before the end o f the year, and 34 new chapters were formed, including 10 in Iowa and 7 in Texas. The total 315 chapters and 16,000 members were distributed in no neat sociological pattern from California to M assachusetts.10 This was a movement that cannot be easily classified as “right,” “left,” Democratic, Republican, liber­ al, conservative. North, South, or W est, though it was largely m iddle-class and rather more educated.

World Fudorolst Resolutions Introduced In Congress U nited W orld Federalists was designed to influence Congress and the U.S. Governm ent. On 9 July 1947, Senator Glen Taylor (D., Idaho), with 15 co­ sponsors, introduced a new world government resolution in Congress. (His first was in 1945.) The Senate bill (SCR-24) was identical to 9 identical House bills (H CR-59-68) introduced by Representatives W alter H. Judd (R., M innesota), Brooks Hays (D ., A rkansas), and, curiously enough, Richard M . Nixon (R., C alifornia), among others. (For texts, see Appendix H.) W orld government was clearly still viewed by American law m akas and the public as a possible alterna­ tive course for American foreign policy while the im plications of the Truman doctrine w ere sinking in. Taylor introduced his resolution immediately after Congress completed debate on the Greek-Turkish loan (first installm ent on the Trum an doctrine). Two years before, Taylor had found no co-sponsors for a sim ilar resolution. T aylor made a m ajor address in support o f his resolution. He pointed a gloom y picture of what a program o f national security would lead to: an arms race consuming the national budget, forced decentralization of industry and popu­ lation as a defense measure, loss o f civil liberties in antisabotage and antiespio­ nage program s, and finally life “on the brink of extinction.” The alternative, ac­ cording to Taylor, was world security, the deliberate “surrender” o f each nation’s “portion of its sovereignty which gives it the right and the power to make war.” Taylor recommended that the United States take the lead in declaring its readiness to restrict its own sovereignty, its independence, in order to secure world peace. He proposed legislative, executive, and judicial reforms in the United Nations.211* * “Proof from the Polls,” World Government News, October 1947, pp. 3-4; Quar­ terly Report, 1 September-31 December 1947, UWF Papers, 42. North Dakota, de­ spite Daniel Q. Posen's efforts, remained unorganized. He seems not to have coupled his warnings about the atomic threat with practical political organizing, such as forming chapters in the new UWF. 11 U.S. Congress, Senate, Address of Senator Taylor in Support of SCR-24, 80th Cong., 1st sess., 9 July 1947, ibid., 93: 8506-14.



In the debate on the Greek-Turkish loan, there had been widespread congres­ sional criticism o f the U .N. as well as opinion favoring its strengthening, which Taylor quoted, but so rapidly was the split between the United States and the So­ viet Union developing, so natural the national defensive response, so weak the world government opposition, that hearings on Taylor’s minority proposal were put off until after the debate on the M arshall plan. This meant that the hearings were not held until the spring o f 1948. Such a postponement was sure to mean that the opportunity to begin a bold new policy toward world government would be lost, if indeed there w o e enough awareness of the nature of the problem o f w ar in m id-1947 to unite Congress on the revolutionary solution.

Prospacts for o UN. Review Conference In 1947, Argentina, apparently without prompting from anyone in the world government movement, placed an item on the agenda o f the U.N. General As­ sembly, scheduled to reopen in September, calling few a general conference under Article 109 to consider abolition of the veto. This was very like Cuba’s initia­ tive o f the year before. Since abolition of the veto in the Security Council im­ plied a substitute plan to introduce weighted voting or perhaps m ajority rale o f popular representatives in the General Assembly, Grenville Clark thought anoth­ er opportunity was presenting itself to fundamentally reform the U nited N a­ tions.” The U.S. State Department was hostile. The Argentine initiative had crane in July 1947, ju st after appearance of the X (George Kennan) article on “The Sources of Soviet Conduct,’’ which was the Truman administration’s public de­ fense o f its new containm ent policy. M eyer found State convinced that “the Russian regime will collapse under the pressures of a continuing arms race.” He was reminded of General M arshall’s prediction when H itler attacked Russia that the Red Army could not last more than six weeks!8 As the September 17th General Assembly opening approached, Meyer learned that M arshall planned to demand abolition o f the veto without any further chang­ es in the Charter, as in the Baruch plan. To federalists like M eyer, this was transparently to use the U.N. as a weapon in the Cold W ar. The intention seemed to be “to force Russia’s hand,” even to produce “Russia’s withdrawal from the UN,” he told Clark. The opening o f the Assembly proved to be a showdown for Russian and American foreign policies at the start of the Cold W ar. Secretary M arshall on the 17th roundly accused the Russians of holding up the peace treaties with Germany and Japan, threatening the independence o f Greece by infiltration from their Balkan satellites, preventing the reunification of Korea, and abusing the veto power. He proposed setting up a “study” committee to explore changes to the veto rule and a permanent “interim committee" o f the 1 11 Clark to Meyer, 30 July 1947, UWF Papers, 33; Grenville Clark, Suggested Res­ olution of the General Assembly of the United Nations Constituting and Instructing a Special Committee on Amendment of the Charter, 12 September 1947, Clark Papers, 21 . 10 . “ Meyer to Clark, 4 August 1947, UWF Papers, 33.

* i — —— i A rJ n ıfc ın n m € POLITICS OF WORLD FEDERATION

to UWF groups. But many in UWF and out, students, radicals, and all those out­ side the mainstream, responded positively.1* In the summer of 1947, the Russians walked out o f the M arshall plan meet­ ings in Paris and then established the Cominfonn in September. The U.S. Con­ gress passed the National Security Act. The prospects for U N . reform were so bleak that M eyer and other UWF leaders considered not holding their first annual convention. Students, inspired by the Chicago committee, like Steven Benedict, began to criticize UWF’s cautious goal of lim ited world governm ent9 But the greatest challenge came from Harris Wofford and Claire Lindgren, just back from M ontreux and fired with the idea o f a truly world-wide movement utilizing the peoples’ convention approach to get around the opposition o f national govern­ ments. hi an open letter to the chapters, they charged headquarters with “intransi­ gence against broadening the policy statement,” with spreading “hysteria” against Henry Usbome, and of proposing to postpone the annual convention in order to avoid him—“one o f the great men the movement has produced." They outlined his plan and urged that the United States not fail to elect delegates to the peo­ ples’ convention in Geneva in 1950, along with Britain and other countries. They com pared United W orld Federalists to the 1915-20 League to Enforce Peace, which, with ex-President Taft at the top and 300,000 members, “crumbled at the critical m oment because o f the deviation of m ost of its ‘big nam es/ around whom everything had been b u ilt" Wofford and Lindgren called for a “real grassroots organization.”9 M eyer coolly protested errors of fact and asked the students not to send out the letter. But it was too late. Many chapters had already objected to holding meetings where Usbome was going to speak on the peoples’ convention. Four meetings that headquarters did schedule were canceled by Usbom e’s publicity agent because of “other engagements,” but the visiting Englishman knew he was unwelcome.11 From our perspective, the threat of war, which led young peqple to grasp revolutionary measures, was exaggerated. UWF was not run dictatorially by a small New York clique. The so-called big names had been some o f the most devoted and exposed workers and contributors of large sums o f money, who were trying to take a more measured course. M eyer clearly had a diplom atic edge, but it was the Cold W ar that was defeating the movement. M“Federalists of the World, Unite,” Worid Government News, September 1947, pp. 1-4; Minutes, Executive Council, 6 September 1947, UWF Papers, 43. MSteven Benedict, UWF: Limited or Unlimited? 31 October 1947, Benedict Pa­ pers. MHarris Wofford and Clare Lindgren to All Delegates to U.W.F. St. Louis Assem­ bly, 12 October 1947, Schwimmer-Lloyd Collection, T-64. ,l Meyer to Wofford and Lindgren, 22 October 1947, UWF Papers, 42; Wofford to Meyer, 25 October 1947, ibid. Meyer and Upsur Evans, apparently to win a vote of confidence, submitted their resignations to the council on the eve of the St. Louis convention. The council did not accept them. Minutes, Executive Council, 31 Octo­ ber, 7 December 1947, ibid., 42.

Cord Mayor Mdrutroam World Foderalsm


Henry S«m»or> on the Qwlenge to American» In the United States, probably the m ost significant statem ent favoring the cause was that o f the distinguished elder statesman, former secretary of state and o f w ar Henry L. Stim son, in an article for Foreign Affairs in October 1947, w hich was a corrective to “X." Stimson was close to Grenville Clark and, while he did not become a vice-president of UWF, he was convinced a third world war had to be avoided. Ultimately, he recognized, that meant world governm ent At 80, he m ade one o f his last surveys o f the world scene. Basic principles for the United States, Stimson thought were to put away fi­ nally any idea o f isolationism and to realize that the world was one o f many peo­ ples who did not all share or want the American way of life. He counseled pa­ tience with the Russian leaders, neither trusting them while they remained con­ vinced that American society was dying nor giving in to the senseless program o f preventive war. The middle course was something like a liberal containment policy, where the m ain em phasis would not be on m ilitary m easures, but on proving the viability o f capitalism and democracy in the W est. Stimson did not think Russia posed the threat o f war. The M arshall plan was the sort o f imme­ diate policy be supported, provided that Americans did not aim to rebuild Europe “in the American image.” B ut Stimson added—this was the passage cited throughout the world govern­ m ent m ovem ent—that American policy should always bear in mind the “final goal” :” Lasting peace and freedom cannot be achieved until the world finds a way to­ ward the necessary government of the whole. It is important that this should be widely understood, and efforts to spread such understanding are commen­ dable. Surely there is here a fair and tempting challenge to all Americans, and especially to the nation’s leaders, in and out of office.

Eisonhowor on World Föderation As United W orld Federalists’ first annual convention at St. Louis approached, C ord M eyer invited General Dwight D. Eisenhower to give the keynote address. T hat such an invitation could even be seriously made indicates the stature of the m ovem ent in 1947. In those days, when both the Democrats and the Republi­ cans were wooing him to run in the next presidential elections, Ike was the natu­ ral leader to draw the United States and the world toward so great a goal as world federal governm ent But Ike declined. So did Justice W illiam O. Douglas and R obert M . H utchins. UWF had to content itself with a written message by A lbert Einstein, conveyed by Harrison Brown.” ” Henry L. Stimson, ‘The Challenge to Americans,” Foreign Affairs, 26 (October 1947): 5-14. MM inutes, Executive Council, 6 September 1947, UWF Papers, 43; “Inescapable Conclusion,” World Government News, June 1947, p. 6; Dwight D. Eisenhower. Cru­ sade in Europe (New York: Doubleday, 1948), 476-77 (cf. 459); Meyer to Milton Ei­ senhower, 26 February 1948, UWF Papers, 33.



Toword a Vcriaty of Appioodws and Maximal World Federation The first United W orld Federalist annual convention in St. Louis in Novem­ ber 1947 produced a wary entry into the W orld M ovement for W orld Federal G overnm ent. V arious changes were m ade to the bylaw s, perm itting state branches to elect representatives to the council, which was a move toward decen­ tralization; but at the same tim e procedures were defined whereby the council could discipline chapters whose “purposes and activities" conflicted with UWF’s. The “Beliefs and Purposes” statem ent was m odified to perm it conjoint w ork along both PC and U.N. reform lines, but UWF leadership and the m ajority o f members were never w illing to grant the PC more than grudging toleration. The St. Louis convention also produced an elaborate statement, largely af­ firming the "U nity and D iversity" statem ent of the summer, on the principles and powers o f the proposed world federal governm ent Universal membership, reservation o f undelegated powers, enforcem ent o f world law on individuals, weighted representation, a bill o f rights, revenue power, and reasonable amend­ m ent provisions were affirmed, as were such "lim ited" powers to preserve peace as prohibitions o f armaments in excess of internal police forces, atom ic energy control, and provisions for world inspection, police, and armed forces. W hat was new was a cautious statement pointing in the direction o f eventual

Other powers: We recognize that although some world federalists believe that such limited powers would be sufficient as a beginning, others are con­ vinced that any world organization to be effective, even at the start, must have broader powers to bring about peaceful change in the direction of a free and prosperous world community. Such differences as exist among world fed­ eralists on this point are mainly questions of timing. There is full agreement that we should move as rapidly as possible to a World Federal Government with authority and power to legislate on other basic causes of international conflict.

The executive council was largely reelected. It included Mayne Albright; Ro­ bert Lee Humber, Ralph Lindstrom of Los Angeles; Samuel Levering o f Virgi­ nia; M ark Van Doren, the poet and Columbia professor, Edgar Ansel M owrer, who had worked so hard in the U.N.; Reginald Lang, Carlton college professor and leader o f the student institutes; Norman Cousins; Thomas M ahony; A.J.G. Priest; Abraham W ilson, UWF’s counsel; Paul Thatcher o f Utah; Alan G reen, advertising executive; Alan Cranston, who would lead the fight in California for a constitutional amendment permitting U.S. participation in a world federation; M ildred Blake; Edison Dick, Chicago benefactor and enemy of W orld Republic; Shane Riorden, H arvard student; Colgate Prentice, retiring Student D ivision president; Lawrence Fuchs, new Student Division president; Fritjof Thygeson, dynamic high school organizer, Steven Benedict o f Common Cause; and G illes Corcos, French veteran and University of M ichigan chief o f the Student D ivi­ sion’s international committee.

GordMeyw: McriratraamWorldFédsraAsm


J. A. M igel m ade a surprise appeal for contributions from the small gather­ ing and was successful in raising $31,000, which ended the immediate financial crisis. A dram atic gesture came when 13 students volunteered to take the next sem ester off from school to work on an expense basis to spread the gospel o f w orld government. The national press began to more seriously cover the world federalists.*4

Leodanhlp of Urtfod World Fndnrotsts A t the start o f 1948, United W orld Federalists contended for leadership o f all w orld government groups on the political scene in the early Cold W ar. Clarence Streit’s A tlantic U nit» group still consisted o f unorganized readers of his jour­ nal, Freedom and Union, but they were the nucleus of an organization that in another year, in the North Atlantic Treaty era, would be a m ajor contender with UWF. Ely Culbertson had put together another loose group o f people on a mail­ ing list, the C itizens’ Com m ittee for U nited N ations Reform (CCUNR), who supported his deceptive but influential Quota Force plan for an international po­ lice force. G. A. Börgese was ju st beginning to make known the maximal pro­ posals for w orld governm ent of the Chicago committee through his scholarly journal. Common Cause. The W orld Republic boys, though they appeared to have exhausted their psychological and financial resources, retained a potential for leading a popular movement toward a revolutionary people’s convention. A lbert Einstein’s Emergency Committee of the Atomic Scientists was closing dow n for la d t o f funds in the face of the defeat of negotiations for the interna­ tional control o f atom ic energy in the U N . Atomic Energy Commission, but the cause o f atom ic control still had w orld-w ide support, as indicated by the U N . G eneral Assembly’s consideration of the m atter in Paris later in 1948. In Europe, British M.P. Henry Usbome’s Crusade for W orld Government and die Continental W orld Movement for W orld Federal Government offered opportu­ nities for an American organization, which, because of U.S. economic and polit­ ical supremacy after W orld W ar n , necessarily would have to take the lead. By 1948, still with Judd and Hays did reintroduce HCR-64 (same number) on 22 February 1951, but it was shorn of the term “world federation open to all nations.” It drew only 9 co­ sponsors.

Th» Koraan Wer and Ih* D odr» of îho Federabî Movomnrtf


hunt for cover. D espite all the anticipation, warnings, brave attempts to avoid a nuclear arm s race, and idealistic/realistic campaigns to make a start toward the rule o f w orld law, war had crane. It was disreputable and dangerous to the de­ fense o f the country to advocate a union with the enemy. Cord M eyer quietly joined the CIA in O ctober 1951; his was an extrem e case, but not untypical. Some wise and untouchable heads like Grenville Clark did not regard the Korean W ar, in the long history of struggle to establish the rule o f world law, as a ter­ m inal event But for the m ovem ent it was the end, as we will now see. A fter Chinese troops were introduced into the war and M acArthur began to demand to use nuclear weapons, Alan Cranston of UWF recalled that W orld W ar n began in rem ote places like Manchuria, Ethiopia, and Spain, and he observed, “There are those in W ashington and elsewhere who believe that W orld W ar in has now started in Korea.’' 4 By Christmas, he and the UW F leadership were so troubled that they began to talk o f world federation as a war aim:* * If we are now in the opening stages of World War IB. world federation pro­ vides the only hope for a decisive and lasting settlement. Our new policy statement, adopted at the Washington [UWF] General Assembly, states: ‘I f this hope is not realized in time, and war is again to be our fate, then our pur­ pose in that war must be to build the world federation that alone can give meaning to the sacrifices victory will cost.“ There was talk about changing UWF policy back to an Atlantic (democratic) federation in order to better resist the Soviets (Cranston was on that side, but M eyer, interestingly considering his later move to the CIA, remained true to uni­ versalisai). The internal controversy was resolved in a UWF executive commit­ tee decision in January 1951 to abandon the field program and concentrate on a “top-dow n" approach to U.S. leaders—an understandable but disastrous decision in the history o f the movement.4 G renville C lark’s view, as usual, was broad, even-tem pered, and prescient. Cranston quoted it in the same Christmas 1950 message: The crisis may well further deepen, but this should not too much discourage us because it is often the case that formidable and proud opponents will only settle at the last moment, and must actually look down into the abyss before they turn away. Now we are coming somewhere near to doing just that and probably, if we now avoid a general war (as I think we will), we will continue near the abyss for quite a long time. If this be so, people will continue more and more to be looking for a constructive way out. T hat abyss, o f course, was the long Cold W ar with its threat of general nuclear destruction. By the tim e that Truman removed M acArthur in 1951, Elisabeth M ann Bor4 Cranston to Ed McVitty, 6 December 1950, UWF Papers, 36. 1 Alan Cranston, Federalism at Christmas, 1950, ibid. * ‘T o Meet the Crisis,” World Government News, February 1951, pp. 3-4.



gese o f the Chicago Committee to Frame a W orld Constitution commented on how the war had changed prospects for the federalists. She observed a “m arked decrease" in the previous six months of “intelligent discussion o f the topic.” The committee itself was in process of dissolving. She explained:7 Today journals of general interest just do not discuss the issue, not because the topic is exhausted, but because, with the Korean war and the increased tension over Western Germany, the goal seems remote indeed. As long as the present East-West tension lasts, there are obviously no chances for a peaceful development toward world government. She could only hope that some “genius in statesmanship" or some diplom a­ tist “in the spirit o f the great tradition of both America and Russia” could solve some of the issues in Germany, Korea, and Japan then dividing die form er allies. Her solution was a kind o f minimal world security agency, not unlike a func­ tioning U nited N ations, which could then evolve into a w orld governm ent* H istorically, it is notable that the maximalists, by the pressure o f actual w orld events, were forced to take up the banners o f minimalism and functionalism, ju st as the universalists reconsidered Atlantic union. W ar traded to unite even world federalists.

AnM-Commurist Slurs W ith the Korean W ar cam e a kind o f rehearsal o f crating M cCarthyism . Charges o f Communist party affiliation were not nearly so destructive o f the movement as the State Department’s opposition and that o f knowledgeable peo­ ple in policy-m aking circles,' but for ordinary members they were frightening enough. The UWF national office as early as 1948, after publication o f the Ten­ ney Report o f the House Committee on Un-American Activities, took the pre­ caution o f m aintaining a thick “confidential" file o f charges o f Communism against all its advisory board and officers. No attem pt was made to refute char­ ges, since m ere appearance in a list seemed disproof enough—for example, M ark Van Doren, N ational Council o f A m erican-Soviet Friendship; or A lbert Ein­ stein, Committee o f One Thousand to Abolish the Committee on Un-American 7 Elisabeth Mann Borgese, ‘Taking Bearings,” Common Cause, 4 (April 1951): 449-50. •Ibid. ’ The State Department sent the director of the Office of Public Affairs, Francis H. Russell, to the Washington, D.C., chapter of UWF on 7 June 1950 to reaffirm oppo­ sition to an attempt to form a world government without Russia. UWF Papers, 36. Raymond B. Fosdick, a former undersecretary-general of the League of Nations, ex­ pressed a sharp refusal to serve on UWF’s advisory board: T am suspicious of your mechanistic approach to this problem (of the weakness of the U.N.]. I am even more suspicious of your perfectionism. It is not only the obstructionists but the perfec­ tionists who make progress in the work! so difficult. Those who don’t want to start until every detail is ideally arranged end up by not starting at all.” Fosdick to Meyer, 18 January 1949, ibid.


Billion, Jean-Francis. Mondialisme, fédéralism e européen, et dém ocratie inter­ nationale. Pavie, Italie: Fédérop, Institut d'études fédéralistes A ltiero Spinelli, V ia Porta Pertusi, 6, 27100 Pavie, 1997. E nglish translation: World Federalism, European Federalism, and International Democracy: A New History o f Supranational Federalist Movements. Pavia and New Y ork: A ltiero Spinelli Institute for Federalist Studies; W orld Federalist M ovem ent, Institute for Global Policy, 2001. 213 pp. By a young French author, particularly sensitive to federalism outside th e English-speaking world—notably continental Europe and Latin America. Boyd-O rr, John, baron. Food: The Foundation o f World Unity. London: N a ­ tional Peace Council, Towards W orld Government, No. 1,1948. 20 pp. B oyd-O rr, the first director o f the U.N. Food and A griculture O rganization, resigned in 1948 in protest against the FAO’s inability to be “above politics'* in supplying die world’s basic need for food. Thereafter he worked for w orld government. Brent, Abraham Rodrigues. Federatie van de wereld. Inleidend wooed door Lord Beveridge. Leiden: H. E. Stenfert Kroese, 1950. 148 pp. B ritish Parliam entary G roup for W orld G overnm ent G ilbert M cA llister, e d . W orld Government: The Report o f the First London Parliam entary C onfer­ ence on World Government. London: Parliamentary G roup for W orld G ov­ ernm ent 1952. 121 pp. This group, led by M .P. Henry Usbom e, labored after 1946 to introduce a British policy favoring world federation. Brugmans, Hendrik. Panorama de la pensée fédéraliste. A vant-propos de R obert Aron. Paris: La Colombe, 1956. 155 pp. Butler, J.R.M . Lord Lothian (Philip Kerr), 1882-1940. London: S t M artin’s, 1960. 384 pp. “Perm anent peace, he believed, could be secured only by som e system o f world governm ent but for the present he set his hopes on close relations b e­ tween the British Commonwealth and the United States.’’ Carr, Edward H allett. The Twenty Years ’ Crisis, 1919-1939: An Introduction to the Study o f International Relations. London: M acm illan, 1940. 312 pp. Fundamental for conflict of realism and utopianism (idealism ) in w orld p o lit­ ics. “W orld federation’’ is an “elegant superstructure’’ that m ust w ait u n til “some progress has been made in digging the foundations.’’ Cassin, René. A rticle in Ici-Paris, 1-8 octobre 1946. Support for world federation by one of the architects o f the U niversal D ecla­

AppandxJ Annotated Bfcèogrophy


ration o f Human Rights. Cited in M arc Agi, De Vidée de l'universalité com­ me fondatrice du concept des Droits de l'Homme d 'a p ris la vie et l'ouvre de René Cassin (Antibes: A lp-A zur, 1980), p. 181. C hurchill, W inston S. The Second W orld War. Vol. 2: Their Finest Hour. L ondra: Bantam, 1949. C hurchill’s account o f the offer of B ritish union with France on 16 June 1940 and the im plications o f its rejection (see pp. 180-84,205-15). C lark, G renville, och Sohn, Louis B. Vürldsfred genom världslag. Trans, by Hans Blix. Stockholm: P. A. N orstedt, 1960. 483 pp. Swedish translation o f this classic. Others follow n ex t ------- o g ------- . Verdensfred gjennom verdenslov. Oversatt etter annen, reviderte utg. av Torkel Opsahl. Oslo: G nindt Tanum, 1960. 372 pp. ------- e t ------- . La paix par le droit mondial. Trad, par Francis Gérard; préface de Paul G eouffre de la Pradelle. Paris: Presses U niversitaires de France, 1961. 545 pp. ------- u n d --------. Frieden durch ein neues Weltrecht: die notwendige Umgestal­ tung der Vereinten Nationen. Deutsch übersetzt von Claus W eiss. Frankfurt am Main: M etzner, 1961. 611 pp. ------- y ------- . La paz por el derecho mondial. Traducciön por Enrique Jardi. Barcelona: Bosch, 1961. 440 pp. ------- e n -------. Wereldvrede door wereldrecht. Vertaald door mr. W.M. Peletier. Haarlem: H.D. Tjeenk W illink, 1961. 412 pp. Com m ittee to Fram e a W orld C onstitution. Projet de constitution mondiale. Préface de Thomas Mann. Paris: Nagel, 1949. 91 pp. ------- . Disegno prelim inare di costituzione mondiale, proposto e firm ato da Ro­ berto H utchins et aL Con una presentazione di Pietro Calamandrei. U nica traduzione di Elio Gianturco. Milano: M ondadori, 1949. 147 pp. ------- . Ist eine Weltregierung möglich? Vorentwurf einer Weltverfassung. Vor­ geschlagen und unterzeichnet von Robert M. Hutchins e t al. Die deutsche Ü bersetzung wurde von Prof. Friedrich Glum redigiert Frankfurt am M ain: S. Fischer, 1951. 150 pp. C urry, W illiam B. The Case fo r Federal Union. Hammondsworth, M iddlesex: Penguin, November, 1939. 213 pp. Equivalent in England to Streit’s Union Now.



C urtis, Lionel. “Untem pered M ortar The C ase for O rganic U n io n /' and A l­ trincham , Lord (Edward G rigg). “B ritain’s Role in the W orld Today: A C riticism o f the Federal C ase.” The Round Table (London), 38 (M arch 1948): 324-30. Curtis’s final defense o f his federalist ideas—countered by Altrincham ’s argu­ m ents for a m ilitary alliance with the United States. De R usett, Alan. Strengthening the Framework o f Peace: A Study o f C urrent Proposals fa r Amending, Developing, or Replacing Present International In­ stitutions fo r the M aintenance o f Peace. London: Royal Institute o f Interna­ tional Affairs, 1930. 223 pp. Includes Lord C ecil’s draft treaty o f collective self-defense under the U H . Charier; United Nations Association’s proposals to develop the U.N. w ithout Charter amendment; Lord Davies’s international police force and w orld equity tribunal; Henry Usborne’s peoples’ world convention; David M itrany’s func­ tionalism ; and virtually all others in Britain and America. D uck», Pierre. L ’évolution des rapports politiques depuis 1750 (liberté, integra­ tion, unité). Préface de B. M iritine-G uetzevitch e t M. PteloL Paris: P ress­ es U niversitaires de France, 1930. 344 pp. Een Verden. Een verden eller ingen. Udg. a f Foreningen Een Verden under re daktion a f Svend-A ge HestofL Kpbenhavn: Samlerens forlag, 1949. 23 p p . Evans, A rchibald, and W aterlow, C harlotte. Europe, 1945-1970. London: M ethuen Educational, 1973. 316 pp. D iscussion o f European integration and its implications for w orld federation. By a former ILO official and a schoolteacher, both W orld Federalists. Gladwyn, H ubert M iles Jebb, baron. Memoirs. London: W eidenfeld & N icolson, 1972; New York: W eybright & Talley, 1972. 422 pp. For most o f his official career a “great power man,” Lord G ladw in by 1960 became convinced that G reat Britain and its liberties could not survive unless she joined the European Community. He contrasts him self w ith C lem ent Attlee, “a world government man." Habicht, M ax. The Power o f an International Judge to Give a D ecision ex aequo et bono. London: New Commonwealth Institute, 1933. 86 pp. ------- . “Disarm am ent and W orld Federalism .” Lecture at the Institute o f M undialist Studies, Château de La Lambertie, France, Summer, 1978. The problem o f war is not only to ban the weapons, but to p re sa v e control, even during tim es o f grave international disputes. Control im plies m onitor­ ing, compulsory judicial determination of fact, and enforcem ent T hese func­

A ppandxâ Annotated DM ogrophy


tions require a world state. Sw itzeiland provides a model. So do Clark and Sohn. H aegier, R olf Paul. H istoire et idéologie du mondialisme. Zürich: Europa Ver­ lag A.G., 1972. 252 pp. A history not only o f the European m undialization movement but also o f the w orld government movement in general. H oyland, John S. Federate o r P erish London: Federal Union, 1944. 202 pp. “People sometimes speak as if a W orld Union would be a leap in the dark—a w ildcat scheme o f visionary fanaticism . On the contrary, it is plain practical common sense, already prepared for by long and elaborate constitutional ex­ perience in many lands.” H itler, Adolf. M y New Order. Edited with commentary by Raoul de Roussey de Sales. New York: Reynal, 1941. 1,008 pp. L ast attem pt to establish a wider order in Europe or the world by force. The very opposite o f what federalists aim to do by nonviolence. H uddleston, John. The Earth Is But One Country. London: B ahâ'f Publishing Trust, 1976; 2nd ed., 1980. 185 pp. “The purpose o f this book is to show how the Bahâ’f Faith m eets the needs o f m ankind today, and how it is building up w hat is believed w ill be a new w orld-w ide civilization in which all peoples can live together in justice, har­ mony, and peace. The emphasis is on the practical means to this end as w ell as on the dream." Israel, Fred L., ed. M ajor Peace Treaties o f M odem History, 1648-1967. [From the Treaty o f W estphalia to the Tashkent Declaration.] Introduction by Ar­ nold Toynbee; com m entaries by Em anuel C hill. New York: C helsea House, 1967. 4 vols. “It w ill be seen that a system o f treaty relations, em bodied to a large extent in treaties o f peace, is no substitute for a body o f law, backed by an irresist­ ible authority for enforcing i t . .. If there is to be an effectively enforced world law, there has to be an effective world governm ent This is one o f the lessons o f the present collection o f modern treaties.” Jackson, Barbara (W ard), Lady, and Dubos, René. Only One Earth. New York: N orton, 1972. “A full and open sharing o f new knowledge about the interdependence o f the planetary system s on w hich we all depend can also help us, as it were, to creep up on the infinitely sensitive issues o f divisive econom ic and political sovereignty.” W ritten for the U.N. Conference on the Environm ent (Stock­ holm , 1972).



Jaspers, Karl. “Em pire universel ou ordre mondial.” Translated from the G er­ man. Table Ronde, 25 (January 1950): 26-37. John x x m , Pope. Pacem in Terris. Encyclical letter addressed to all m ankind, Rome, April 11, 1963. Boston: S t Paul Editions, 1963. 61 pp. “The universal common good poses problem s o f w orld-w ide dim ensions which cannot be adequately solved except by the efforts o f a public authority endowed with a wideness of powers, structure and means o f the same propor­ tions: that is, o f public authority which is in a position to operate in an e f­ fective manner on a w orld-wide basis.” Jouvenel, Bertrand de. Sovereignty: A n Inquiry into the Political Good. J. F . Huntington, trans. Chicago: University o f Chicago Press, 1957. De Jouvenel searches for the origins o f ideas o f authority, the political good, sovereignty, and liberty. Joyce, Jam es Avery, ed. First Principles. London: Herbert Joseph, W orld U ni­ ty Publications, No. 1, 1945. 28 pp. “The purpose o f these monographs is to present, in a short and handy form , a series of studies on world reconstruction.” Includes Salvador de M adariaga, “W orld Government: Dream or N ecessity?’ Larmeroux, Jean. Les États-U nis du monde. Paris: J. & R. Sennac, 1946.62 pp. By first president o f the W orld M ovement for W orld Federal G overnm ent Laszlo, Ervin, e t al. Goals fo r Mankind: A [Fifth] Report to the Club o f R om e on the New H orizons o f G lobal Community. New Y oik: D utton, 1977. 434 pp. Exposition o f goals held throughout the w orld as guides to future action. “The achievement o f world solidarity is the great imperative o f our era.” Laursen, Finn. Federalist Theory and World Order. Amsterdam: Institute for G lobal Policy Studies, Occasional Paper No. 4,1986. 29 pp. Federalists should rem ain federalists but should becom e m ore fam iliar w ith current trends in theory (just world order) and practice (European integration. United Nations, New International Economic Order, peace movement). Layton, Christopher. One Europe: One World; A First Exploration c f E urope’s Potential Contribution to World Order. London: The Journal o f W orld Trade Law in association with the Federal Trust for Education and R esearch, 1986. 70 pp. “This essay is inspired by the belief that the tim e has come for a united Eu­ rope to take up its responsibilities for working for a more united w orld.”

Annendir I Annotated Bfeloofoohv


L othian, Philip K err, llth m arquess of. Pacifism Is N ot Enough, N or P atri­ otism Either. Preface by W illiam Beveridge. London: Oxford University Press, 1935; 2nd ed., 1941). 57 pp. This is a classic o f world federalism. Lothian was a colleague o f Lionel Cur­ tis. Both eventually favored A tlantic union with the United States, though Lothian is remembered as a champion of European federation. ------- . Pacifism Is N ot Enough: Collected Lectures and Speeches. John Pinder and Andrea Bosco, eds. Foreword by D avid Astor. London: Lothian Foun­ dation Press, 1990. Includes speeches on the international anarchy leading to W orld W ar I, the outlaw ry of war, the K ellogg-B riand pact, the necessity for federation, and A nglo-A m erican cooperation at the beginning o f W orld W ar n . Luard, David Evan T. Nationality and Wealth: A Study in W orld Government. London: Oxford University Press, 1964. 370 pp. Sophisticated economic argum ent for U.N. reform and world union, written before the Vietnam W ar and the last desperate phase o f the Cold W ar. T h e real problem that faces the world today is not whether world government is to be achieved; but how this is m ost effectively to be accom plished given the existing configuration o f power and institutions.” M adariaga, Salvador de. World Government: Dream or Necessity? London: H. Joseph, W orld U nity Booklet No. 1,1946. 28 pp. As the League o f Nations broke up, M adariaga (Spanish delegate) established a “W orld Foundation,” which was one o f the roots o f the (American) Com­ m ission to Study the Organization o f Peace. M arc, Alexandre. L'Europe dans le monde. Paris: Payot, 1965. 238 pp. Integral federalism by a former leader o f the W orld M ovement for W orld Fed­ eral G overnm ent M archand, Guy. “D raft o f a W eald Constitution.” In M undialist Summa (Paris: Club Humaniste, 1977), pp. 75-78. A national senate and popular house (w eighted by education) are provided. A lso councils o f wise men, o f human rights and duties, o f social and econo­ m ic concerns, and o f m inorities. M aritain, Jacques. M an and the State. Chicago: U niversity o f Chicago Press, 1951. 219 pp. The Catholic scholar proposed a “supreme advisory co uncil... endowed with unquestionable moral authority” instead of a world government.



M ayne, Richard, and Pmder, John, with Roberts, John C. de V. Federal Union: The Pioneers: A History o f Federal Union. Foreword by Lord Jenkins o f H illbead. London: M acmillan, Federal Trust for Education and R esearch, 1990. 278 pp. Full-dress history o f England’s Federal Union organization and its influence on events, from C hurchill's offer o f union to France in 1940 to B ritain’s e n ­ try into the European Community and the larger projects o f European an d world federation. M itrany, D avid. A Working Peace System: An Argum ent fo r the F unctional Development o f International Organisation. London: Royal Institute o f In ­ ternational Affairs, 1943. 56 pp. Functionalism , which is here presented in its original form, has proved to b e the most successful o f all alternatives to world federation. M itrany called the process “federalism by installments.” M onnet, Jean. M emoirs. Trans, by Richard M ayne. Intro, by G eorge B all. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1978. 544 pp. “Have I said clearly enough that the Community we have created is n o t an end in itse lf? ... Like our provinces in the past, our nations today m ust learn to live together under common rules and institutions freely arrived a t . .. A nd the Community itself is only a stage on the way to the organized w orld o f tomorrow.’’ Orwell, George. “W ells, Hitler, and the W orld State.” In Critical Essays (Loodon: Seeker f t W arburg, 1946). Reprinted in U .S. as D ickens, D ali a n d Others (New York: Reynal f t Hitchcock, 1946), pp. 115-23. “All sensible men for decades past have been substantially in agreem ent w ith w hat M r. W ells says; but sensible men have no pow er and, in too m any cases, no disposition to sacrifice themselves.” Politis, N icolas Socrate. Le grand problème du XXe siecle, la syntise de Tordre e t de la liberté. Lisboa: Faculdade de D ireito da U niversidade de L isboa, 1942. 166 pp. Ransome, Patrick, ed. Studies in Federal Planning (1943). Introduction by Sir Charles Kimber. London: Lothian Foundation Press, 1990. 363 pp. Contains m ost o f the Federal Tracts (1939-41) that marked the culm ination o f the English federalist movement and that helped create the clim ate o f opin­ ion favorable to Churchill’s offer o f union with France on 16 June 1940. Reves, Emery. Anatomia della pace. Traduzione di Irene Rossi Doria. Firenze: Edizioni U, 1946. 256 pp.

Apptndbt J: Annotated Bfcfcçfophy


------- . Anatom ie de la paix. Paris: J. Tallandier, 1946. 313 pp. ------- . Fredens anatomi. Overs, ved Axel Pille. Kdbenhavn: P. Branner, 1947. 214 pp. ------- . Fredens anatom i Overs, av Johon Hambro. Oslo: J. G. Tamım, 1947. 232 pp. ------- . D ie Anatom ie des Friedens. Übertragung aus dem Amerikanischen von Friedrich Fischer. W ien: Europa Verlag, 1947. 281 pp. --------. O e anatom ie van de vrede. U it bet Am ericaans vertaald door H. Schut-van N ierop. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 1947. 287 pp. R oberts, John C. de V. W orld Citizenship and M undialism : A G uide to the Building o f a W orld Community. W estport, CT: Praeger, 1999. Reflections after a lifetim e of working for the ideal erf world federation. Robbins, Lionel, boron. “Liberalism and the International Problem .” In Rob­ bins, Politics and Economics. New York: St. M artin's, 1963. pp. 134-33. Confronts paradox o f liberal support for the state and the rule o f law in order to protect the freedom o f the individual, yet for anarchism in the relations be­ tween states. Needed today is a common authority to maintain economic or­ der, practically a w orld federation with powers lim ited to defense, foreign policy, regulation o f trade, immigration, and finance. N ext steps: European federation, then Atlantic federation. Roosevelt, G race G. Reading Rousseau in the Nuclear Age. Philadelphia: Tem­ ple U niversity Press, 1990. 273 pp. Tim ely exploration o f the political assum ptions that w ould m ake possible agreem ents to establish a federation o f the world. A general will, or feeling o f identity w ith hum anity, is not natural, Rousseau adm itted, but it can be created by art or international organization. R ussell, Bertrand. “The Bomb and Civilization.” Forward, 29 September 1945. F irst instance o f R ussell’s argum ent favoring threatening the Soviet Union into renouncing nuclear weapons. ------- . Bulletin o f the Atom ic Scientists. 3 (July 1947): 170. Called for preventive war when the Russians rejected the “m ajority plan” for the international control o f atomic energy. ------- . “W orld Government: By Force or Consent?” New Leader, 31 (4 Sep­ tem ber 1948): 8 -9. C haracteristic argum ent by 1948 for world government as a war aim o f the



expected Third W orld W ar. Above articles cast a warning that even philoso­ phers can be earned away by war hysteria. Schwarzenberg, Georg. Power Politics: An Introduction to the Study o f In ter­ national Relations and Post-W ar Planning. London: Gape, 1941. 448 pp. By the third edition (1951,1964), this was a popular text, somewhat equival­ ent in Britain to Hans M orgenthau’s Politics among Nations. The 1941 e d i­ tion has three chapters on federalism : “Social Forces behind Federation,” “Problems o f Federation,” and “Blue Prints for Federation.” Taylor, Peter J., ed. W orld Government. New York: Oxford U niversity Press, 1990. 256 pp. A new work o f political geography. “The aim o f this volum e is to unravel the processes that are shaping the w orld o f politics today in order to under­ stand the possibilities that lie ahead.” T aylor's use o f the term governm ent is rather equivalent to Americans' governance. Tinbergen, Jan, et al. Reshaping the International Order IRIOJ: A [Third] R e­ port to the Club o f Rome. New York: Dutton, 1976. 325 pp. Principles and measures that m ust be adopted if a m ote ju st and equitable — and presumably more peaceful—world society is to evolve. Toynbee, Arnold. A Study o f History, 12 vols. London and New York: O xford U niversity Press, 1934,1939,1954,1961. Toynbee believed that the great challenge to W estern civilization was its ser­ ies o f world wars. It was an open question whether a creative response could be summoned from W estern hearts, or the W est would succumb to the tem p­ tations of the usual m ilitary state. ------- . “The International Outlook.” Civilization on Tried. New York: O xford U niversity Press, 1948, pp. 126-49. The political issue is not whether but which way the w orld w ill be united. ------- . Change and Habit: The Challenge o f O ur Time. New York: O xford U niversity Press, 1966. 240 pp. Toynbee’s later views on whether a w orld-w ide state is feasible. It is, tech­ nically; but our political habits are opposed. They can be changed and prob­ ably w ill be, under the pressure o f social change o r death. Som e la n d o f world government w ill exist by 2000. Trevor-R oper, Hugh. “Arnold Toynbee’s M illennium.” Encounter, June 1957, pp. 14-28. Cruel and witty attack that “turned professional opinion among the younger generation o f historians in the English-speaking w orld decisively ag ain st

AppondxA AonolotedBHography


Toynbee's global and prophetic vision.’' Trevor-Roper ridiculed *1116 univer­ sal w orld-state with its universal w orld-religion o f M ish-M ash." U sbom e, Henry, e t al. Crusade fa r W orld Government: The Plan in Outline. London: The B ritish Parliam entary Com m ittee o f the Crusade for W orld Governm ent, n.d., c. June 1947. 13 pp. Pam phlet that launched the movement for a peoples' convention in Geneva, 1950. W agar, W . W arren. H. G. W ells and the W orld State. New Haven: Yale U ni­ versity Press, 1961. 301 pp. “H is cause, all his life, was a scientifically planned unitary world state, not a federation o f sovereign nations." W ells, H erbert G eorge. The Shape o f Things to Come. New York: M acmil­ lan, 1933. 431 pp. W ells’s m ost explicit and im aginative weak on world government. A w orld council and an elected world parliam ent would wither away in a world united by science, education, and technology. ------- . Phoenix: A Summary o f the Inescapable Conditions o f World Reorgani­ sation. London: Seeker & W arburg, 1942. 192 pp. W ells’s last work on the world state. "There w ill never be a W orld State, as we apprehend a Stale." For studies, see W agar and Orwell. W est, Ranyard. Psychology and World Order. New York: Pelican, 1945.125 pp. One o f a handful o f books that penetrate the confusions o f modern politics to its underlying psychology. Contains a chapter on the psychological condi­ tions for world order and world governm ent W heare, K. C. Federal Government. London: Oxford U niversity Press, 1946; 4th ed., 1963; Greenwood reprint, 1980. 266 pp. Defined federalism as the division erf powers such that the general and region­ al governments are each coordinate and independent Also emphasized politi­ cal factors, particularly defense, among the conditions for uniting federally. Cf. Friedrich and Deutsch. W oolf, Leonard S. The Future o f International Government. Labour Party, 1939. 9 p p . In Attlee, Labour’s Aim s in War and Peace, pp. 111-20. This is an update on a larger work that originally was w ritten in 1915. By W orld W ar n , W oolf was severely critical of unrestrained national sovereign­ ty. He preferred a Franco-B ritisb union, European federation, and something very like the eventual U nited N ations O rganization as m ore practical next steps to ultim ate world federation.



W ofld M ovement for W orld Federal Government. “M ontreux Declaration.” A u ­ gust 23, 1947. In Stop War: The M ontreux Conference. London: B ritish Branch o f WMWFO, 1948, pp. 8-9. Founding docum ent o f the international federalist m ovem ent—the W orld M ovement and its successor, the W orld Association o f W orld Federalists. Youth and Student D ivision, W orld Association o f W orld Federalists. W orld Peace through W orld Economy. Assen, Netherlands: Van Gorcum , 1968. 147 pp. D iscusses neglected point o f w orld econom ic reform as a precondition to w orld federation. Includes papers by Jan Tinbergen, A m itai E tzioni, and others. Zolo, Danilo. D avid M cKie, trans. Cosmopolis: Prospects fa r W orld G overn­ ment. Cambridge (U.K.): Polity Press, 1997. O riginally w ritten by an Italian professor, this book is critical o f w orld gov­ ernm ent in principle since in practice any foreseeable new w orld order w ill be hierarchical and controlled by the rich and powerful countries. The protection o f human rights by a United Nations controlled by the veto countries is typi­ cal. Zolo is doubtful that a w orld citizenry w ill soon develop that w ould de­ mand a democratic, representative U N .

Russiaand the Soviet Union “A gainst the Bourgeois Ideology o f Cosm opolitanism ." Voprosy filo so fii, 2 November 1948, Current D igest o f the Soviet Press, 1:1 (1949): 3 -1 1 . “Homeless cosm opolitanism ” was a special term o f opprobrium coined for all notions o f international friendship, universal culture, and w orld govern­ m ent w hoi the Soviet U n it» began an ideological cam paign to prepare the Soviet peoples for possible war with the W est in 1947. “W orld governm ent” was the epitome o f the “ideological banner” o f American im perialism . Barsegov, Y uri, and Khairov, Rustem. “A Study of the Problem s o f Peace.” Journal o f Peace Research (Oslo), 10 (1973): 71-80. “Q uite naturally, the existence o f opposite social system s rules out any pos­ sibility for the creation o f a ‘world government’ or o f any w orld-scale organ­ ization o f a supranational character.... [The U.N.O. at the present stage o f history] is the only possible form o f an international organization o f a uni­ versal nature.” Berdyayev, Nicolay A. “The Crisis of Man in the M odern W orld.” International Affairs, 24 (January 1948): 100-06. By the exiled Russian theologian. “It is only religious belief w hich w ill be able to resist the forces which seek to dominate the world.”

Àmurîir 1 Afwotatid DfalooFOohv 0*

^ İ B


W % P İW w



Bogdanov, O. V. “A Soviel View o f D isarm am ent” International Institute for Peace, Vienna. World Federalist, January 1965, pp. 14-16. Proposals o f C lark and Scrim, since they imply interference in the dom estic affairs o f the Soviet Union, are condemned. “W orld law" would be an instru­ m ent o f W estern im perialism , since the W est would have a m ajority in any w orld assem bly or court. "The creation o f any type o f ‘w orld state’ or o f a ’w orld law ’ under present conditions would be utopian and incompatible with the course o f social developm ent in our times.” Brucan, Silviu. The Dissolution o f Power: A Sociology o f International Rela­ tions and Politics. New York: Knopf, 1971. 388 pp. By a Romanian scholar. "The U.N. m ust be given the authority to plan, to m ake decisions, and to enforce them—or it w ill disappear altogether.” C offey, J. I. “The Soviet View o f a Disarmed W orld.” Journal o f Conflict Res­ olution, 8 (M arch 1964): 1-6. From the Soviet perspective, the U .S. concept o f disarm am ent tends to "w orld governm ent... the end o f the present world order in w hich states ate responsible ultim ately only to them selves." The Soviet concept sees a world o f "sovereign and theoretically equal states,” in which peaceful settlem ent o f disputes would be accomplished by “mutual concessions and seeking m utual­ ly acceptable settlem ents.” D ean, V era M icheles. The United States and Russia. Cambridge, MA: Harvard U niversity Press, 1947. 321 pp. "W hat m arks Russia today is not so much that it is either uncommonly na­ tionalistic o r uncommonly propagandist in its foreign policy, but that it is telescoping developments which in W estern countries were spread over centu­ ries.” D iedisbeim , Jean. "W orld G overnm ent” Peace: A W orld Review, February 1951, pp. 6-1 0 . O ne o f few instances when w orld governm ent was view ed fairly in a Com­ m unist journal. D unayeva, E. “Cosmopolitanism as a W eapon o f the Im perialist Reaction.” Izvestia, 18 A pril 1950. The official organ o f the Presidium o f the Supreme Council o f the U.S.S.R. reported: "By spreading the poisonous ideology of cosmopolitanism, Ameri­ can im perialists try to disarm ideologically freedom -loving peoples which defend their national independence, try to infect them with disregard for their co u n try ... and to lull their vigilance.”



Goodman, E lliot R. The Soviet D esign fa r a W orld State. New Yock: C olum ­ bia U niversity Press, 1960. S12 pp. The U.S.S.R. has two problem s with w orld government: there is no w orld community on whose good w ill the Soviet Union can rely, and nationalism has been particularly strong since the defeat o f Nazi Germany. Y et national­ ism in the satellites is splitting Communism, and B olshevik ideology w as internationalist. Goure, Leon, et al. Convergence o f Communism and Capitalism : The Soviet View. M iam i: U niversity o f M iam i, C enter for A dvanced International Studies, M onographs in International Affairs, 1973. 168 pp. Soviet and American societies are becoming m ore m ixed—partly socialist and partly capitalist Halpern, Frieda F. “The W orld G overnm ent Plan.” Sunday Worker, 19 M arch 1950. Sponsors o f the A tlantic Union Committee, United W orld F ederalists, and C itizens Com m ittee for U nited N ations Reform prove that capitalists and m ilitarists, not workers, are behind the world governm ent m ovem ent Their object is “putting Russia in her place ... all under the slogan o f the need for peace.” Israelyan, V. “Against Utilitarianism and C harter Review.” In Alvin Z. R ubin­ stein. The Foreign Policy o f the Soviet Union. New York: Random H ouse, 1960, pp. 329-34. Soviet rejection o f Louis B. S ohn's Commission to Study the O rganization o f Peace proposals o f 1969. “The shortcomings and ineffectiveness o f the [U.N.] organization, especially in questions o f m aintaining peace, do not stem from any so-called im perfections o f its Charter, but from the fact that the im perialist powers grossly violate the high aims and principles expressed in it.” Kedrov, B. M . “To the Editors.” Kultura i zhizn, 22 M arch 1949. Current Di­ gest o f the Soviet Press, I: 13 (1949): 12-13. Public retraction o f “cosmopolitanism” by Russian professor and e d ito r-in chief o f Voprosy filosofii. His chief offense seems to have been h is denial that questions o f priority in science (even if Russian) have im portance K latk, GrenviT, i Son, Lui B. Vredenie ko vtoromu (ispravlennomu) izdaniiu m ezhdunarodnyi m ir putem m irovogo prava. [Introduction to Second (Revised) Edition o f W orld Peace through W orld Law .] K em bridzh, M as­ sachusetts: Izd-vo G arvaid-skogo Universiteta, 1960. 71 pp. This is the Russian translation o f World Peace through World Law th at A dlai Stevenson delivered to N ikita Khrushchev during the negotiations o f the


M cCloy-Zorin agreement oo tbe principles for general and complete disarma­ m ent M astny, Vojtech. Russia’s Road to the Cold War: Diplomacy, Warfare, and the P olitics o f Communism, 1941-1945. New Yoik: Colum bia U niversity Press, 1979. 409 pp. Based on American, British, and accessible Soviet and East European sources. Stalin would not base Russian security on cooperation w ith the W est He did not know where to draw the line for his sphere o f influence. The W est's failure, argues M astny, was not to actively oppose his expansion earlier. M odrzhinskaia, E. D. “Cosm opolitanism .” Great Soviet Encyclopedia, 3rd ed. (1976), 13:190. “Proletarian internationalism is opposed to bourgeois cosm opolitanism . Cosm opolitanism calls for the merging o f nations ... by forcible assim ila­ tion. M arxists, on the other hand, envision the gradual and voluntary draw­ ing together and then merging o f nations because o f the objective course of social developm ent” M olotov, V. M. Address to tbe United N ations, O ctober 29,1946. Pravda, No­ vem ber 1,1946. Quoted in “Statements from the Soviet Union.” Common Cause, 1 (July 1947): 29. H ighest-level Soviet pronouncem ent against w orld governm ent “[Some] seek to establish their w orld dom ination by way o f political pressure, ... m ilitary preparation and econom ic expansion, clothing such a policy as a program for the creation o f a United States o f Europe or for the establishm ent o f a single world governm ent" Sakharov, Andrei D m itrievich. Thoughts on Progress, Peaceful Coexistence, and Intellectual Freedom. New York: Norton, 1968. 158 pp. G reat plea for a new Soviet domestic and foreign policy by a prom inent Rus­ sian atom ic scientist. Predicts world government by the year 2000 through convergence of communism and capitalism. Sandom irsky, V era. “Zhdanov’s Form ula in O peration.” Common Cause, 1 (M ay 1948): 393-94. R eport on new Russian ideological campaign against the W est in afterm ath o f Trum an doctrine and M arshall plan. Typical notions to be rooted out: “form alism ,” “servile worship o f all things foreign,” American “bourgeois culture,” and literary themes o f war weariness, suffering, and destruction. Shakhnazarov, G eorgi. “The W orld Community Is Amenable to Governm ent [upravlyayem ostm irom j.” Pravda, 15 January 1988. FBIS-SOV-88-014,22 January 1988.



This stunning departure from Soviet policy was typical o f “new thinking" in the Gorbachev era. Shakhnazarov reviews the world government m ovem ent and the reasons why it was unacceptable in the 1940s and ’50s (decoloni­ zation. world dom ination o f U.S. capital) He presents a renew ed argum ent for developing the U .N. into a world government: adm inistration o f regular functions in health, education, and disaster relief, developm ent assistance, re ­ versal o f arm s race, protection o f environm ent, protection o f hum an rights. Replies by A. Bovin, “W orld Community and W orld Governm ent,” ibid., 1 February 1988, and by G. I. Tunkin, “M echanism o f the Secure W orld," ibid., 18 June 1988. ------ . “G overnability o f the W orld." International A ffairs (M oscow ), 34, 3 (M arch 1988): 16-24. A t the peak o f perestroika. The world is increasingly “interrelated, interde­ pendent, and integral," and neither great-pow er theory nor the theory o f com­ peting social systems explains i t L enin's theory o f interdependence im plies internationalism , cooperation, and “a m ore governable w orld.” “A w orld governm ent could be formed in the future,” based on greater equality among states and form ed for the purposes o f arm s control, econom ic cooperation, environm ental protection, regulation o f technical relations like com m unica­ tions, and protection o f human rights. “Sovereignty, the people’s w ill, is not infringed in any way by the voluntary delegation o f part o f one’s pow ers to an international or supranational authority.” Sorokin, Pitirim A. The United States and Russia. New York: E. P. D utton, 1944. A rare book o f friendliness and deep respect at a time o f the W orld W ar n al­ liance. “If the respective governments do not commit the stupidest blunders, Russia w ill constitute in the future our best and m ost im portant ally.” The work contains the finest comparison o f the frontier movements in R ussia and America ever written. Sorokin here commented negatively on A tlantic union, positively on world federation. ------- . “M utual Convergence o f the U nited States and the U .S.S.R . to die M ixed Socio-C ultural Type.” International Journal o f Comparative Sociolo­ gy, 1 (1960): 143-76. Leading W estern source for doctrine o f “convergence.” Tunkin, G regorii I. Theory o f International Law. Translated with introduction by W illiam E. Buder. Cambridge: Harvard U niversity Press, 1974. 497 pp. M ost authoritative Soviet book on international law. D enies the S talinist concept that there are a socialist international law and a bourgeois one. B asis o f international law is “agreement between states." Contains a fair critique o f World Peace through World Law.

Aûotndbc A Annotated Mbiooroohv


V avilov, Sergei, e t al. MAbout Certain Fallacies o f Professor A lbert Einstein.” N ew Tim es (M oscow), 26 Novem ber 1947. R eprinted in B ulletin o f the Atom ic Scientists, 4 (February 1948): 34, 37-38. Response to E instein's open letter in United Nations World o f October 1947. O nly fairly considered response from Russia to W estern proposal o f w orld governm ent until perhaps the m id-1970s. Zhdanov, A. A. Address to Founding Convention of Cominform, Poland, Sep­ tem ber 1947. Quoted in World Government News, January 1948. “T he idea o f 'w orld government,’ which some bourgeois intellectuals o f the dream er and pacifist type have taken up, is b an g used not only as a means erf pressure for the purpose of an ideological disarmament of peoples who defend their independence from the encroachment of American imperialism, but also as a slogan especially directed against the Soviet Union, which indefatigably and consistently defends the principles o f genuine equality and of safeguarding the sovereign rights o f all peoples, great and small.”

Asia B asu Chaudhuri, Ashok Kumar. "Revision o f the U.N. Charter." Agra Univer­ sity Journal o f Research (Agra), 5 (January 1937): 145-54. B halerao, M. R. A Plea, Urgent Entreaty, fo r W orld Government. L ashkar, Gwalior, India: 1950. 20 pp. C hatterji, M . N. "Reflections on the Amendment o f the U N . Charter.” M odem Review (Calcutta), 6 (December 1956): 458-62. C haudhuri, Sanjib. A Constitution fo r W orld Government. Calcutta: Bhupal Chandra D utta A rt Press, 1950. 246 pp. Recommended by Prime M inister N ehru's sister, M adame V ijaya lakshm i Pandit, ambassador o f India to the U N . ------- . Steps to W orld Federal Government through a Constitution fo r W orld Government Placed before the United Nations. Calcutta: Author, 1950.12 pp. ------ . Steps fo r the Formation o f the First Parliament o f the World. C alcutta: W orld Constitution Office, 1952. 4 pp. Chaudri, M . A. "Flaw s in the United Nations Charter.” Pakistan Review (La­ hore), 4 (October 1956): 30-44.



Cboue Y oung-seek. The Creation o f a New C ivilized World. Seoul: M oonsungdang Publishing Co., 1951. ------- . World Peace through Pax UN. Seoul: Kyung Hee U niversity Press, 1984. Dev, Shankar. One World, One Government. New Delhi: All India A ssocia­ tion o f W orld Federalists, 1974. 96 pp. Dhungyal, Tulasi Prashad. The Way to World Peace. Babaras: Khadananda Pra­ sad, 1952. 41 pp. Freeman, Peter. The Government o f the World. M adras, India: A dyar Library, 1952. 60 pp. R eprint from bode Where Theosophy and Science M eet (1952). Frydman, M aurice. The World Federation and the August Resolution o f the Indian National Congress. Aundh: Aundh Publishing Trust, W orld Federation Library, 1944. 33 pp. Ghose, Sri Aurobindo. The Ideal o f Human Unity. New York: D utton, 1950; revised ed., 1953. 400 pp. ------- . The Human Cycle: The Meal o f Human Unity, War and Self-determ ina­ tion. Pondicherry: Sri Aurobindo Ashram, International Center o f Education Collection, vol. 9, 1962. 912 pp. Goetz, Hermann. Commonwealth o f Tomorrow. Foreword by Sir R. P. M asani. Allahabad: Indian Periodicals, 1944. 181 pp. Hoyland, John S. Gandhi and WorM Government. London: Crusade for W orld Government, n.d., c. M arch 1948. 23 pp. “W e m ust aim at a fam ily of independent W orld States, w hich necessarily rules out all internal arm ies.... If by India’s efforts such world federation ... is brought into being, the hope o f die Kingdom o f G od m ay legitim ately be entertained” (Harijan, 13 July 1947). Indian Council o f W orld A ffairs. Revision o f the United N ations C harter: A Symposium. New Delhi: Indian Council o f W orld Affairs, 1954. 144 pp. Kartuş, Sidney. Aurobindo: Prophet o f Human Unity. San Francisco: Cultural Integration Fellowship, 1961. 37 pp.

Appondx J: Annotated Dfeloyaphy


L arson, Arthur, ed. Foreword by U T hant A Warless World: Problem s and Opportunities o f a Disarmed World under Law. New York: M cG raw -H ill, 1963. 209 pp. Essays by Louis B. Sohn, Arnold Toynbee, W alter M illis, A rthur Larson, Kenneth Boukling, Hubert Humphrey, Grenville Clark, M argaret M ead, W il­ liam E. Hocking, and Jam es W adsworth. Appendix on Russian ideas. M adhavtirtha, Swami. One World Government Based on Field Theory. Ahme­ dabad: Author, 1954. 124 pp. M ahabharati, Alokananda. The M aster's World Union Scheme: Being a Scheme o f W orld Federation on the Basis o f the Fatherhood o f God and the Brotherhood o f M an.... B am aiP.O .: Am rit M andir [Temple o f Nectar], Anmachal M ission, India, 1921. 250 pp. Schem e o f Thakur Dayananda, a Sannyasin [sadhu, Hindu holy m anl; pre­ sented by A. M ., his disciple. ------- . Ending the Communist M enace: Atlantic Union or W orld Union. C al­ cutta: Arunachal M ission, W orld Peace Office, 1962. 60 pp. M clnnis, E. “Revision o f the Charter.” India Quarterly (New Delhi), 11 (A prilJune 1955): 116-24. M ullick, Uditendu Prakash. One World, One State: United Nations and World Government. Calcutta: Author on behalf o f M. S. Banga Saraswati Prakasanalaya, 1978. 102 pp. Patel, Satyavrata Ramdas. World Constitutional Law and Practice: M ajor Con­ stitutions and Governments. Delhi: Vikas, 1970. 495 pp. Pratap, M ahendra. W orld Federation with Unity o f Religions and the Economic System o f One Joint Family. Brindaban: W orld Federation, 1952. 68 pp. Radhakrishnan, Sarvepalli. Is This Peace? Bombay: Hind Kitabs, 1945. 74 pp. Limited world government needed. Rajagopal, V. League o f the Peoples, India and Abroad. Madras: Vavilla, 1952. 31 pp. Taylor, Edmond. Richer by Asia. Boston: Houghton M ifflin, 1947. 431 pp. “There are a great many m ote believers in the one-w orld ideal in the W est to­



day than there were Bolsheviks in Russia at the tim e o f the O ctober [1917] revolution, or Christians in the Roman em pire at the tim e o f C onstantine’s conversion. Something holds them back.... The trouble is that w e d o n o t believe in soul-force in the modem W e s t... W e believe that w e can order one world by m ail and have it come wrapped in cellophane.” U niversity o f Chicago Round Table. The Problem o f W orld Government. C hi­ cago: Round Table, 524 (4 April 1948). 29 pp. Radio discussion between Jawaharlal Nehru, W ellington Koo, and R obert M . Hutchins (m Asian views of world governm ent W orld Federation. Vrindaban, U ttar Pradesh, India: 1929-1941, 1946-1962. Aryan Peshwa Raja M ahendra Pratap, founder, Shiva Kum ar Pratap Singh, ed. Begun in Berlin, this early Indian journal was published successively in the U.S.A., Japan, and China, and in India after 1946.

Jopon Ayusawa, Iwao. The Road to World Federation. Tokyo: Sekai Rem po K ensatsu Domei, 1966. Includes review of Clark-Sohn plan, World Peace through World Law. Inagaki, M orikatsu. Sekai rempo kempo [W orld Federal ConstitutionJ. Tokyo: Author, 1965. 139 pp. M odel constitutions, analyses o f arguments, and personal recollections. Japanese R esearch Com m ittee. “W orld Federal C onstitution." (1980).

E v o lu tio n

Kalo, Shunsaku. Fifty Years o f United World Federalists o f Japan. 1998. Sekai Renpo Kensetsu Domei (United W orld Federalists o f Japan], ed., Seka i renpo undo 20 nennsi [Twenty Years o f the W orld Federalist M ovem ent]. Tokyo, 1969. 615 pp. Tabata, Shigejiro. Sekai seifu no shiso [Thought on W orld G overnm ent]. To­ kyo: Iwanami shoten, 1950. 253 pp. Contains Chicago committee’s Preliminary D raft o f a W orld Constitution. Takada, Yasuma. Sekai shakai ron [The W orld SocietyJ. Tokyo:

C hugai

AppendxJk Annotated BMography


shuppan, Sekai keizai koza dai 1 kan, 1947. 280 pp. By a prom inent Japanese econom ist The last chapter is on the way to a w orld state. Tanaka, Seimei. Sekai rempo: Sono shiso to undo (W orld Federation: Ideolo­ g y and Movement]. Tokyo: Heibonsba, 1974. 385 pp. Excellent book in Japanese—comprehensive and infonnative. Y oshihara, ShOhachiro. Sekai seifit no kiso riron ( Fundamental Theories o f W orld Government]. Tokyo, 1962. Q uotes Em ery Reves, Cord M eyer, Grenville Clark, and Louis B. Sohn.

LolinAmerica A lvarez Faller, F. J. Tendencias hacia una federaciôn international. M esones, M exico: Cos ta-A m ie, 1963. 144 pp. Survey o f international organization from Bolivar’s Congress o f Panama to the Council of Europe. Hope for eventual world federation. A rce, José. Ahora. M adrid: Espasa-C alpe, 1950. 293 pp. Translated as R ight N ow . M adrid: Blass, 1951. 180 pp. Includes “Proyecto de reforma de la Carta de San Francisco,” pp. 243-92. By Argentina’s first representative to the United Nations. ------- . La Carta de San Francisco: posibilidad de su revisiön. Buenos Aires: Academia de C iendas Economfcas, 1958. 30 pp. A rgentina. Convocation o f a General Conference under Article 109 o f the Char­ ter to abolish the privilege o f the veto. D raft Resolution. 22 July 1947. A /351. Resolution calling for a general review conference, following up Cuba’s o f the year before. For discussion, see Summary Record (F irst Com m ittee). Septem ber 19,1947. 2 0 /0 /4 7 . A/BUR/SR.36. A ugusto, José. A federaçüo mundiaL Rio de Janeiro: Berzoi, 1954. 32 pp. A valos Pérez, Jesus. Union de estados soberanos: Un proyecto parafuturo. M exico, D.P.: U niversidad N ational, 1943. 80 pp. Cf. Padilla. Blanco Gasper, Vicente. E lvotoponderado. M adrid: Institute H ispano-L usoAmericano de Derecho Intemacional, 1981. 228 pp.



Castro, Josué de. Géopolitique de la faim . c. 1957. De C astro was a Brazilian member o f Parliam ent and vice-president o f the W orld Association of W orld Federalists. Congreso Hispano-Luso-A m ericano de Derecbo Intem acional (Saö Paulo, octubre de 1953). “Reforma de ta C arta de las N acionesU nidas." Revista perua­ na de derecho intemacional (Lima), 14 (1954): 135-35. Changes proposed to Articles 2 ,4 ,2 7 , and 28. Costa Rica, Council o f the University for Peace. University fo r Peace. Ciudad Col6n: Council, n.d., c. 1984. 16 pp. The university, founded in 1981, is conceived as a teaching institution o f higher education, ultim ately with about 2,000 students and an international faculty. Areas o f study: education for peace, human rights, com m unica­ tions, econom ic developm ent, non-violence, conflict resolution, scientific cooperation, cultural studies, and disarm am ent Cuba. Convocation o f a G eneral Conference o f M embers o f the U nited N ations under Art. 109 o f the Charter. Letter (B elt to Sobolev). 17 Septem ber 1946. 2 pp. A/75. Earliest request for inclusion on the General Assembly agenda o f the convo­ cation o f a general review conference to elim inate die veto privilege. Cf. Argentina next year. Disandro, Carlos A. El gobiem o mondial y las tensiones de la sinarquia. M ar del Plata, Argentina: Editorial M ontonera, 1971. 19 pp. Donoso Velasco, José Ignacio. La carta fundam ental de las naciones. Q uito, Ecuador: Imp. “Bona Spes,” 1949. 27 pp. Escârcega Peraza, Florencio, ed. Un gobiem o m ondial M exico, D.F.: Im preso en Editorial Universo, 1968. 174 pp. E spailtat de la M ota, Francisco. M ayans, 1944. 241 pp.

Teorts del estado terrdqueo. N ew Y ork:

Fem indez-H idalgo, M. N. La union mondial; estudio sobre la revolucidn del futuro. M exico, D.F.: C osta-A m i Institute Autonome de D esarrollo y Ptaneacidn Economics, Colecciön ciencias sociales, 12,1974. 350 pp. Fernändez Rodriquez, Lorenzo. Cddigo universal etem o. Pitrufquen, C hile:

Apparate* Annotated Bfelography


A uthor, 19SS. 168 pp. G arcia A rias, Luis. La universalidad y la igualdad en la organizaciôn intem acional: ante la reforma de la Carta de las N.U. La Paz, Bolivia: Universidad M ayor de San Andrés, Escuela de Derecho y Ciencias Politicas, Cuademo 13, 1953. 26 pp. G a rd a Rivera, Armando. Cosmocracia. Lima, Peni: Author, 1947. 158 pp. G utiénez y Sânchez, Gustavo. La carta magna de la comunidad de las naciones. L a Habana, Cuba: Editorial “Lex,” 1945. 589 pp. C uban views on developing the U.N. Charier, 1944. L agos, Gustavo, and Goday, Horatio H. Revolution o f Being: A Latin Am eri­ can View o f the Future. New York: Free Press, 1977. 226 pp. Latin American perspective for the W orld Order M odels Project Langley, W inston E. “Irenology and the U niversity for Peace.” Scandinavian Journal o f Development Alternatives, 5 ,1 -2 (June-Septem ber 1986): 51-63. T he U niversity for Peace assumes that a quasi-ideal world order is conceiv­ able, that human beings have the capadty to construct and m aintain i t that individuals (in the spirit o f G andhi) lead in this transform ation, and that loyalty extends to all humanity. Lehuede Chaparro, Héctor. La supranacionalidad. Santiago, Chile: Facultadde Ciencias Juridicas y Sociales, Seminario de Derecho Publico, no. 18, Edito­ rial Juridfca de Chile, 1966. 107 pp. Level Osuna, Bernardo. Una posiciön frente al nuevo orderjuridico intemacional. M érida, Venezuela: Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Derecho, 1965. 30 1 p p . M arshall, R obert A. Can M an Transcend H is Culture? The Next Challenge in Education fo r Global Understanding. W ashington, DC: American Associa­ tion o f State Colleges and Universities, 1973. 106 pp. R eport on sem inar on internationalization o f curricula held at Lake Chapala, M exico, 19-27 February 1972. Goal: "integrating education into effort to awaken a new mentality of rapprochement among peoples." M artin, A ntonio Edmundo. E l estado federativo universel. Ciudad T rujillo, D om inican Republic: Impr. M ontalvo, 1943. 128 pp.



M asel, Segismundo. Anteproyecto de transformation de la O.N.U. en confederatiö n mondial de las nationes con gobiem o universal poseedor exclusive de las armas bélicas. Buenos Aires: Editorial L a Vox del M undo, 1973. 15pp. M atilla, A lfredo. Proceso historico del intem ationalism o. Cuidad T rujillo. Dominican Republic: 1944. 237 pp. Mek), Roque Gadelha de. Um govem o mondial e o problème da guerrae da paz. Bahia, S9o Salvador, Brasil: Livraria Progresso, Estante de sociologia e poUtica, 7 ,1 9 5 2 . 148 pp. M endonça, G entil de Carvalho. O estado international. R ecife, B rasil: Tese para a Faculdade de D ireito do Recife, 1943. 74pp. M ovimiento pro Federaciôn Americana. A Plan fo r Peace: An American Feder­ ation, a European Federation, and an Asiatic Federation Coordinated in One World Organization (a M odified United Nations Organization). B ogota Edi­ fie » Crane, “El Grâfico,” 1951. 38 pp. The idea o f federation is m isused » “elim inate the political pow er o f Com­ m unism ." John Foster D ulles is quoted for the American federation, Paul Reynaud for the European, and Carlos P. Romulo for the A siatic. O rzabal Quintana, Arturo. A m irica Latina y el im perativo de un m undo sin guerra. M exico, D.F.: C osta-A m ic, 1963. 122 pp. Padilla, Ezequiel. Paz permanente y dem ocratic international. Cuidad M exico: Depaitam ento de Infotm aciön para el Extranjeio, Serie cultural, 9 ,1 9 4 4 . 20 pp. “Enduring Peace cannot be established without first creating the juridical sta­ tus that w ill maintain i t Those who contend that w ar is a result o f anarchy in international relations are rig h t" Pim entel, A. Fonseca. Democratic World Government and the U nited Nations. Brasilia: Escopo Editera, 1979; 2nd ed., 1980. 158 pp. By a retired Brasilian official. The U J4. m ust become a w orld governm ent Relgis, Eugen. Cosmometdpolis. Versiôn espafiola por Eloy M ufiiz. M ontevi­ deo, Uruguay: Editiones “Humanidad," 1950. 142 pp. Reyes Verdusco, Raymundo. Concepto de federalism o. M exico, D.F.: Escuela Libre de Derecho, tesis, 1963. 52 pp.

Anrrnrlr k Annololid Mbİooroohv


R ipka, H ubert. Las pequehas y las grandes naciones co n d itio n s para una nueva organizaciön international. M exico, D.F.: Ediciones latino-am ericanas del Institute panamericano de bibliografla y documentaciön, 1945. 104 pp. Salvat, Augustin. Reflexiones sobre el ideal ecum inico, e l panamericanismo y la post-guerra. M exico, D.F.: Escuela nacional de jurisprudencia de la Uni­ vers idad national autenom ia de M exico, 1944. 113 pp. Tesis para optar al grado de licenciado en derecho. Sam paio D oria, A ntonio de. O imperio do mundo e as NaçOes unidas. S8o Paulo, B tasil: Limonad, 1962. 126 pp. Santis Durdn, Augusto. D em ocratia mondial, el camino hacia la paz. W orld Democracy: The Road toward Peace. Guatemala: Author, 1949. 67 pp. T beiler, E. “A C arta das NaçOes Unidas e a sua reform a.” Boletim da Sociedade Brasileira de D ireito International (Rio de Janeiro), 13 (janeiro-dezem bro 1957): 103-70. T orre Espinosa, Adolfo. Un mundo nuevo, estados unidas del mundo. M érida, M exico: 1945. 85 pp. Trinker, Frederick W . The Anatom y o f W orld Order: Or a Glimpse at a M ulti­ fo ld W orld Organization. M exico, D.F.: Talleies de B. C osta-A m ic, 1946. 132 pp. V ergara Robles, Enrique. Panamirica en la örbita universal Santiago de Chile: Im prenta universitaria, 1945. 157 pp. Y epes, J. M . "La reform a de la Carta de las Naciones Unidas y el derecho inter­ national americano.” Universitas (Bogotâ), 6 (1954): 47-70.

Aftan Hachey, Thom as E., and W eber, Ralph E., eds. The Awakening o f a Sleeping Giant: Third W orld Leaders and National Liberation. 1981. 160 pp. Context for those few, like Simön Bolivar, Kwame Nkrume, and M ohandas Gandhi, who talked in term s o f federation rather than national liberation on die European model.



N asser, Gam al Abdel. The Philosophy o f the Revolution [1954). Intro, by John S. Badeau; Buffalo: Smith, Keynes & M arshall, 1959. The book that defined “Pan-Africanism.” Ndiaye, Guédel. L ’Échec de la fédération du M ail Dakar. NDA, c. 1955. Federalism is only an instrum ent for solving the colonial crisis. N knnnah, Kwame. I Speak o f Freedom. London: M ercury Books, 1961. ------- . Africa M ust Unite. Paris: M aspero, 1963. Proposal o f a lim ited African federation w ith pow ers for jo in t econom ic planning, continental defense, and common foreign policy. “I am confident that it should be possible to devise a constitutional structure applicable to our special conditions in A frica and not necessarily fram ed in term s o f the existing constitutions o f Europe, America, or elsew here, w hich w ill enable us to secure the objectives I have defined and yet preserve to som e extent the sovereignty o f each state within a Union o f A frican States.” Nyerere, Julius K. Freedom and Unity. London: Oxford University Press, 1967. Another proposal for an African federal state, with powers over foreign af­ fairs, defense, citizenship, currency, custom s, trade, and m inerals. N yerere paid special attention to building political loyalty to “A frica" by people and to providing a sense o f responsibility to the whole o f A frica by executives of the continental state. He claim ed the government o f Tanzania w as ready to initiate the process. Padmore, George. Pan-Africanism or Communism? London: D ennis D obson, 1956. Porté, Alfred S. L ’ordre mondial de l ’avenir. Le Caire: R. Schinder, 1945.46 pp. hi French, English, and Arabic. Senghor, Léopold Sédar. Liberté 2 et 4. Paris: Seuil, 1978. On “federation with the m etropolitan power” as a means to overcom e coloni­ alism and its lingering heritage. Senghor founded L a Parti Fédéraliste Afri­ caine on 3 July 1959 in Dakar. Cf. Ndiaye. ------- . Ce que je crois. Paris: Bernard Grasset, 1990. 254 pp. Contains “La Civilisation de l’Universal.” A review er writes: “T his naive and undefined ideal seems to designate a kind o f apolitical m ulticulturalism on a global scale.” Senghor supported the M ali Federation (M arch-Septem ber 1960). He worked for W est African federation from Dakar to L ake fh a d ,

AppandbcJk Annotated Bfcftography


Nouakchott to Cotonou, and he warned against the “Balkanization" o f Africa. Tennet, Benno. A W orld Federation o f States: Some Suggestions. Johannes­ burg, South Africa: Central News Agency, 1943. 94 pp. Touré, Sékou, L ’Expérience Guinéenne et l ’unité africaine. Paris: Plon, 1959.

W ORLD FEDERALIST BESTSELLERS (Chronological Order) Streit, Clarence K. Union Now: A Proposal fo r a Federal Union o f the Leading Democracies o f the North Atlantic (1939). E ight editions, 250,000 copies. C uny, W illiam B. The Case fo r Federal Union (1939). 100.000 copies w ithin six months. W ifflrie, W endell. One World (1943). 500.000 copies in first month after publication. Lippm ann, W alter. U.S. Foreign Policy: Shield o f the Republic (1943). 500.000 copies. C ort, David. The Great Union: Of, By, and For the People (1944). 7.000 copies by m id-1945. R eves, Em ery. The Anatom y o f Peace (1945). 70.000 copies in 8 printings in 1945 alone. Total: 30 editions, 800,000 copies. N ash, Vernon. Yes, But—Questions and Answers about a Federal W orld Gov­ ernment (1946). 100.000 copies. W hite, E .B . The W ild Flag (1946). 15.000 copies, after appearance in the New Yorker (circulation in 1946: 276,000). Einstein, Albert. Only Then Shall We Find Courage (1947). 175.000 copies. M eyer, Cord Jr. Peace or Anarchy (1947). 50.000 copies.



Committee to Frame a W orld Constitution. Robert M. Hutchins, president; G. A. B örgese, secretary. Preliminary D raft o f a World Constitution (1948). Four translations, 130,000 copies. Holliday, W . T.. MO ur Final Choice." Reader’s Digest (January 1948). Lead article—said to have reached m ote people about world government than any other (24 million—the circulation o f Reader’s Digest). Clark, Grenville, and Sohn, Louis B. World Peace through W orld Law (1938). Three editions, six translations o f the whole book, seven m ote o f the intro­ duction (including Russian). M eadows, Dennis L„ e ta l. The Lim its to Growth: A Report fo r the Club o f R om e’s Project on the Predicament o f M ankind (1972). 3,000,000 copies.

RECENT W ORLD FEDERATION AND U X . REFORM The following works have been deliberately selected for relevance to interna­ tional policy. They often have specialized bibliographies. Few are w ritten from a deliberate world federalist point o f view, but all m ention world governm ent, and all are typical o f critical or new scholarship that observes immense changes taking place in international relations. Reforms are well m apped out for every organ, specialized agency, and function of the United Nations. All that is w ant­ ing for systemic change are a crisis, enlightened national leadership, and a public demanding action.

World PoMcs Bailey, Sydney D. The United Nations: A Short Political Guide. New Y ork: Praeger, 1963.141 pp. The U.N. is based on the princqrie of "sovereign equality," yet, by joining, m em ber-states necessarily accept lim itations on their freedom o f action. Comparisons are made to national politics, not so that readers see the defects o f the U.N. but that they appreciate the historical experim ent o f form ing a political union o f the whole world. Boyle, Francis A. World Politics and International Law. Foreword by L ouis B. Sohn. D urham , NC: Duke University Press, 1985. 366 pp. This is a vigorous defense o f the "legalist-m oralist" school o f political sci­ ence favoring international law and organization against the "realist” school concentrating on national power and self-interest

Appm ix


AnnoiQiwO mutogfopoy


B ull, H edley. The Anarchical Society: A Study o f Order in W orld Politics. London: M acmillan, 1977. 335 pp. T his is the leading B ritish study o f international relations from a ”1031181" point o f view. The author adm its that the subject could as well be disorder, but he m aintaias that, within the international "anarchy,” there exists some order, even without international law or international organization. C laude, Inis L. Jr. Power and International Relations. New York: Random House, 1962. 310 pp. This is a classic exposition o f the fundamental alternatives for ordering the international systems: balance o f power, collective security, and world gov­ ernm ent The three differ m ost fundamentally in the degree of centralization o f power and authority implied. ------- . States and the G lobal System : Politics, Law, and Organization. N ew York: S t M artin’s, 1988. 205 pp. C laude finds that the "system " o f sovereign states is generally orderly, though prone to sudden and disastrous disorder, as in war. W orld govern­ m en t w hile the "ideally correct solution," has not attracted a m ass movement able to establish it as in the establishm ent o f republican states. D ougherty, Jam es E., and Pfaltzgraff, Robert L. Jr. Contending Theories o f In­ ternational Relations: A Comprehensive Survey. New York: Harper St Row, 1971; 3rd ed., 1990. 607 pp. The U.N. has a sm all place in international relations theorizing, being a developm ent o f balance o f pow er (collective security) with im plications for integration (international organization as a step toward world community or world government). Finkelstein, Lawrence S. “Some Aspects o f Power Sharing in International Or­ ganizations.” In John M. Bryson and R obert C. Einsw eiler, eds., Shared Power: What Is It? How Does It Work? How Can We M ake It Work Better? by Lanham, MD: U niversity Press o f America, 1991,309-39. "Pow er in international arenas is ordinarily shared,” w rites the author, an Am erican political scientist. Finkelstein finds power sharing in practice to occupy an interm ediate zone between "centralized m ajority decisions" (world government) and "decentralized unit vetoes” (anarchy). G oldm an. Ralph M ., ed. Transnational Parties: Organizing the W orld's Pre­ cincts. Tenham, MD: U niversity Press of America, 1983. 374 pp. If the General Assembly w ill be made even indirectly representative o f peo­ ples (a second chamber, elected by national parliam ents), then "transnational political parties" w ill surely becom e im portant actors in the nascent w orld political community.




Goodrich, Leland M . and Simons, Anne P. The United N ations and the M ain­ tenance o f International Peace and Security. W ashington, DC: B rookings Institute, 1955. 709 pp. This study reflects serious American liberal and internationalist opinion on the U nited N ations in anticipation o f a U.N. C harter review conference in 1955. The authors conclude that, to strengthen the U N ., neither w orld gov­ ernm ent was practical nor eviction o f the Soviet Union likely to retain the membership of the new nonaligned nations. Haas, Ernst B. "Regime Decay: C onflict M anagement and International O rgan­ izations, 1945-11191." International Organization, 37 (Spring 1983): 1 89235. The author argues that to blame the U.N. for “failure” is to m istake it fo r an autonom ous superstate, “set up to coerce or cajole states into substituting cooperation for conflict.” Haas adm its only that the U N . regim e has “decayed.” Hanrieder, W olfram F„ ed. Global Peace and Security: Trends and Challenges. Boulder, CO: W estview, 1987. 223 pp. In this volume o f public lectures, Richard Falk w arns against easy escapes into utopias like world government, w hich is usually proposed w ithout at­ tending to the hard political work o f the transition, or into m ysticism , o f the M aharishi or new er Californian types. Keohane, Robert O ., and Nye, Joseph S. Power and Interdependence: W orld Politics in Transition. Boston: Little, Brown, 1977. 273 pp. This is a continued critique o f the “realist" theory o f world politics begun in the authors’ Transnational Relations. The U.N. is understood as one interna­ tional organization among many, useful in building tem porary coalitions of stales in an interdependent world but not an “incipient world governm ent” Krasner, Stephen D., ed. International Regimes. Ithaca, NY: C ornell U niver­ sity Press, 1983. 372 pp. By the 1970s, American students o f world politics were generally divided be­ tween ‘’realists,” who focused on the struggle for pow er o f sovereign states, and “liberals” (bere also called “Grotians,” respectful of the reality and poten­ tial o f international law), who argued th a t in addition to states, transnational coalitions, parties, corporations, and individuals contributed to events. The U nited N ations, to these scholars, was not even yet a “regim e,” fo r m ere membership did not constrain state decision malting. Luard, Evan. Types o f International Society. New York: Free Press, 1976. 389 pp. The w orld is at m ost a “society” (Gesellschaft), an association o f states and

Àrrmnrlï 1 Annoiotid Dfclooroohv


peoples linked by trade and intercourse, not always peaceful but possessed erf som e common institutions short o f a government. Luard concludes with a view o f future international societies, particularly one w ith m ature interna­ tional organizations but not an oppressive world governm ent M endlovitz, Saul, ed. On the Creation o f a Just World Order: Preferred Worlds fo r the 1990s. New York: Free Press, 1975. 302 pp. This is the lead volume o f the W orld O rder M odels P roject Contributors aim ed to solve deep global problems—neglected by preoccupation w ith the Cold W ar—o f war in general, poverty, social injustice, environmental decay, and personal alienation. M endlovitz asks how w orld governm ent by 2000 w ill be brought into bong. M iller, Lynn H. G lobal Order: Values and Power in International Politics. Boulder, CO: W estview, 1985. 226 pp. “A basic thesis o f this bode is that the fundamental reason for our frequent failures to m ake the right kind o f policy choices in the w orld today stem s from our continued refusal to see the planetary system as a w hole." M iller shows that government is lacking a t the world level—and with it the fam iliar rule o f law and democratic participation by individuals. R uggie, John G. uOn the Problems o f ‘the Global Problém atique': W hat Roles for International Organizations?” Alternatives, 5 (1979—80): 517-50. G enerally, the global problém atique can be studied under the heads o f over­ population, no lim its to economic growth, and destructive international divi­ sion o f labor. Ruggie expects "rule-governed change" (where states set the rules), not "transform ation o f the intergovernm ental political system ," that is, world governance, not world governm ent Thom pson, W . Scott, and Jensen, Kenneth M ., eds. Approaches to Peace: An Intellectual Map. W ashington, DC: U.S. Institute o f Peace, 1991. 413 pp. This is a m ajor survey o f the literature and conceptual approaches to the reso­ lution o f international conflict by the new (1986) U .S. Institute o f Peace. Surveyed are traditional approaches, international law, conflict resolution, and political systems approaches (Gandhian pacifism, M arxism, liberalism , w orld federalism, world order).

IriÉfriftfirwtl IBB^HI AA LOW FT C orbett, Percy E. The Growth o f W orld Law. Princeton: Princeton U niversity Press, 1971. 216 pp. W ritten during a dark ebb in the Cold W ar, this book nevertheless is one o f the clearest and m ost intelligible studies o f the transition o f international law from a law o f states to a supranational law o f the world community. "Insofar



as universal interests are recognized and brought under collective im plem enta­ tion, the state w ill necessarily be subordinated to supranational agencies exer­ cising, where persuasion fails, some measure o f coercion. This truth m ust be faced even at the risk of temporarily increasing resistance.” D ’Amato, Anthony A. The Concept o f Custom in International Law. Forew ord by Richard Falk. Ithaca, NY: Cornell U niversity Press, 1971. 286 pp. Ib is book is typical o f the shift in jurisprudence aw ay from the p o sitiv ist conception o f law as the command o f the sovereign to a behavioral concep­ tion o f law as process, whose basis o f obligation is consensus. D ’A m ato treats custom ary international law as a way station between “old pow er polit­ ics" and a “world government having central legislative, executive and ju d i­ cial functions." Fisher, Roger. Improving Compliance with International Law. C harlottesville: U niversity Press o f Virginia, 1981. 370 pp. Fisher, a m aster o f negotiation, critiques C lark and Sohn’s W orld Peace through World Law for assum ing that a general international organization should be designed to cope w ith the big problem s o f war, aggression, and breaches o f the peace and for assuming that the method o f enforcem ent is that o f crim inal law reaching to individuals. '“Ib is book starts at the other end o f the problem ." From kin, David. “International Law at the Frontiers.” W orld Policy Journal, 15 (W inter 1998-99): 59-72. The establishm ent o f the International Criminal Court m arks a radical trans­ form ation in law, moving international relations toward w orld governm ent, though the author is cautious about supporting such a move. H art,H .L .A . The Concept o f Law. Oxford: Clarendon, 1961. 263 pp. This is a classic on law, analytical jurisprudence, m oral and political philos­ ophy, and descriptive sociology. The difficulties that the system o f interna­ tional law has no legislature, no independent courts, and no centrally organ­ ized system o f sanctions are disposed of by contrasting the different social contexts o f law within states and between them . International authorities that would be more like municipal ones ate described as a unitary w orld state, federal state, or regime. Jessup, Philip C. A M odem Law o f Nations: An Introduction. New York: M ac­ m illan, 1948. 236 pp. “Until the world achieves some form of international governm ent in w hich a collective w ill takes precedence over the individual w ill o f the sovereign state, the ultim ate function o f law, which is the elim ination o f force fo r the solution of human conflicts, w ill not be fulfilled.”

A m snrlv k Annotated Bfcioooohv


------- . Transnational Law. New Haven, C T Yale University Press, Storrs Lec­ ture on Jurisprudence, 19S6. 113 pp. H ere is an eloquent case for expanding international law during the transition from the “society of states“ to the “world state." “Transnational law” was de­ fined as “a law which regulates actions o r events that transcend national frontiers." K im , Sam uel S. “The U nited N ations, Lawmaking, and W orld O rder." In R ichard Falk, Samuel Kim, and Saul M endlovitz, eds. The United N ations and a Just World Order. Boulder, CO: W estview, 1991,109-24. Kim takes a bold new view o f international law, whose sources now include the G eneral Assembly, for it is the “only available global forum with univer­ sal m em bership and the com petence to discuss any m atters o f international concern where member states can seek a fit between national and common in­ terests as a way o f expressing the general w ill and o f translating this w ill into law ." M cD ougal, M yers S. “International Law and the Future.” M ississippi Law Journal, 50 (1979): 259-334. The author is one o f the founders, with Harold Lassw ell, o f the school o f thought that international law is not the command o f the sovereign but the “process o f authoritative decision through which the members o f a communi­ ty seek to clarify and secure their common interests.” M cDougall agrees w ith Falk that hum anity is moving out of the W estphalian state system into a pluralistic system of states, peoples, and individuals, “with central guidance coating from an as yet unidentified source." M osler, Hermann. The International Society as a Legal Community. Alphen aan den Rijn: Sijthoff & Noordhoff, 1980. 327 pp. “The purpose underlying the choice o f the topics treated in these pages is to show how the international society, consisting of States and organizations set up by States, constitutes a community governed by law ." N ardin, Terry. Law, M orality, and the Relations o f States. Princeton: Prince­ ton U niversity Press, 1983. 350 pp. “Like the hedges to which Hobbes likened the laws, practices keep travelers on the roads but do not prescribe their destinations.” To Nardin, the state system is at m ost a society, not a community. He does not regard it as a de­ centralized version o f the civil state nor as anarchy lacking either government o r rules. A “legal order without a state" is quite possible. O ppenheim , Lassa. International Law: A Treatise. Ed. by H. Lauterpacht. London: Longmans, Green, 7th edition, 1948-52. 2 vols. This is a classic o f international law (first published in 1906). Vol. 1: Peace;



V ol. 2: D isputes, w ar and neutrality. By 1948, Oppenheim’s International Law recognized the necessity for the “obligatory jurisdiction o f international tribunals,” “international legislation,” sense form o f popular “representation,” and the “ultim ate goal of a supra-national legal ordering o f m ankind.” Roling, B ert V. A. “The United Nations—A G eneral Evaluation.” In A ntonio Cassese, ed. U.N. Law/Fundamental Rights: Two Topics in International Law. Alphen aan den Rijn: Sijthoff & Noordhoff, 1979, pp. 23-28. Roling evaluates the U N . by the standard o f peace since 1945— not ju stice, which was not given to either General Assembly or Security C ouncil as a prim ary responsibility. There was too much difference o f opinion about ju s­ tice, as determined by national interests, values, and power. Roling foresees a long struggle for “world unity.” “Students and scholars should be prepared for this com ing controversy, w here the dem ands o f narrow nationalism should be opposed and answered by the demands o f humanity as a w hole.”

U.N. Reform Bertrand, M aurice. A Third Generation W orld Organization. D ordrecht: M. N ijhoff, 1989. 217p. Reflections on the U.N. after 40 years, argues Bertrand, lead to the conclu­ sion that the tim e has arrived to establish a third-generation w orld organiza­ tion. This should be not a world government but an “econom ic U N .” The goal is to build international consensus by improved negotiation processes; only then can serious proposals be considered for undertaking com m on “management” o f global problem s. The book includes long extracts o f his U N . report, Some Reflections on the Reform o f the U.N. (1985), A /40/988. B outros-G hali, Boutros. “Empowering the U nited N ations.” Foreign A ffairs, 71 (W inter 1992-93): 89-102. A m idst practical proposals for peacekeeping and financing, the then U N . secretary-general commented on the central problem o f our time: “W hile re­ spect for the fundamental sovereignty and integrity o f the state rem ains cen­ tral, it is undeniable that the centuries-old doctrine erf absolute and exclusive sovereignty no longer stands and was in fact never so absolute as it w as con­ ceived to be in theory. A m ajor intellectual requirem ent o f our tim e is to re­ think the question o f sovereignty.... It may take m ore than one form and perform m ore than one function.” Cleveland, Harlan. “The M anagement o f Peace." G.A.O. Journal, 11 (W inter 1990-91): 4-23. W ith the ra d o f the Cold W ar, Cleveland rejects a design for “global gover­ nance” on the model o f a world state. The alternative is enhanced interna­ tional cooperation on the “extranational” model o f the European Com m unity.

AppmdxJt Am olotedlMblogpophy


CommissioD on G lobal Governance. Shridath Ramphal and Ingvar C arlsson, co-chairm en. Our Global Neighborhood. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995. 410 pp. A lthough it is claimed that “global governance is not global government” (p. xvi), it is admitted that “good governance requires good government” (p. 61). T he book is informed, up to date, and quietist. It deals with the necessity for greater international cooperation in security, economy, environm ent, rule o f law , and U.N. reform , which would am ount to a novel degree o f world gov* em inent For critique, see Harris below. F alk, R ichard A., Johansen, R obert C., and Kim, Samuel S., eds. The Constitu­ tional Foundations o f World Peace. New York: SUNY Press, for the W orld O rder M odels Project 1993. 388 pp. The world has become interdependent yet the citizens or their representatives are rarely consulted about the formation o f national “foreign” policy and vir­ tually never about “global governance." The end o f the Cold W ar perm its a return to thinking about the constitutional foundations o f a peaceful world, but the approach now is broader and more sophisticated than world govern­ m ent thinking after W orld W ar n . G allarotti, G iulio M . “The Lim its o f International Organization: System atic Failure in the M anagement of International Relations.” International Organi­ zation, 45 (Spring 1991): 183-220. This is a critique o f traditional arguments about the need for “extensive su­ pranational governm ent” from federalists, functionalists, neofunctionalists, modernization and interdependence theorists, and managerialists. The failures o f international organization are not so great, in the author’s view, as to re­ quire m ote than lim ited international organization. G lossop, Ronald J. W orld Federation? A Critical Analysis o f Federal W orld Government. Jefferson, NC: M cFarland, 1993. 262 pp. The author engages the “realists,” the internationalists, the “w orld order” the­ orists, and the religious conservatives in an extended debate about how hu­ m anity at the end o f the Cold W ar w ill “run the world in general.” The tran­ sition to world federation is the great difficulty, since national citizens would have to develop a sense o f responsibility as world citizens, would have to elect w orld representatives to a world legislature for the enactm ent o f the w orld laws, and then would have to obey the laws out o f respect for their jus­ tice (rather than out o f fear of their punishments). H arris, Errol E., and Yunker, Jam es A., eds. Toward Genuine Global Gover­ nance: C ritical Reactions to “Our G lobal Neighborhood. ” W estport, CT: Praeger, 1999. The essays here trace the forces creating global com m unity and those op­ posed.



Hudson, Richard. The Case fo r the Binding Triad. New York: Center fo r W ar/Peace Studies, Special Study No. 7,1983. 30 pp. Form al argum ent, with texts o f amendments to A rticles 13 and 18 o f the U.N. Charter, for the binding triad proposal for decision-m aking in the G en­ eral Assembly. Includes example of resolution o f A rab-Israeli conflict. ------- . T im e for M utations in the United N ations.” B ulletin o f the A tom ic Scientists, 32,9 (November 1976). ------- . Global Report, 93 (Summer 1998). M aznii, A li A. A W orld Federation o f Cultures: An African Perspective. New York: Free Press, 1976. 508 pp. The author regards projects o f world government as prem ature until the val­ ues o f a world culture are more widely shared. M azrui thinks that hum anity is no nearer world government than it was after W orld W ar I, but it is m uch nearer to a world culture. He concludes with a proposal (in his appendix) fo r a “cultural federation," as a model for U.N. reform during a transition to a more effective world political organization. Nye, Joseph S. Jr., A llison, Graham T ., and Carnesale, A lbert, eds. F ateful Visions: Avoiding Nuclear Catastrophe. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger, 1988. 299 pp. A wide range o f alternative visions o f desirable worlds is surveyed: abolition o f nuclear weapons, strategic defense (SDI), no first use policy, nonprovoca­ tive defense, civilian defense, U.S .-S oviet cooperation, Soviet transform a­ tion, U .S. w orld hegemony, internationalism , and w orld governm ent. T h e authors are realistic and doubtful: every alternative to policies o f m assiv e nuclear deterrence and NATO strategy is seen as possibly increasing the lik e li­ hood o f nuclear or conventional war. Schwartzberg, Joseph E. T ow ards a More Representative and Effective S ecurity Council.” Political Geography, 1 3 ,6 (November 1994): 483-91. D efines his “entitlem ent quotients” on which a m ore realistic sy stem o f weighted voting could be introduced to the organs o f the U nited N ations. C f. Richard Hudson’s “binding triad.” ------- . “Needed: A Revitalized United Nations System ." Global D ialogue, 2 , 2 (Spring 2000): 19-31. This issue is dedicated to T h e United Nations: Reform and Renewal.” ------- . “Entitlem ent Quotients as a Vehicle for United N ations Reform.” G lobal Governance, 9 ,1 (February 2003): 81-114.

Appandx J: Annotated BfcKography


U .N . M anagem ent and D ecision-M aking Project. A Successor Vision: The United Nations o f Tomorrow. Ed. by Peter Fromuth. New York: UNA-USA, Septem ber 1987. 116 pp. This work o f an international panel including E lliot Richardson, supersedes the Bertrand report above. Proposals include: elim ination of the General As­ sem bly’s Second (social) and Third (economic) committees, enlargem ent o f Ecosoc to plenary size, m erger o f the Special Political com m ittee with the Fourth (decolonization) committee, creation o f a new commission to coor­ dinate the work o f the development agencies and Bretton W oods financial or­ ganizations, and creation of a new m inisterial board to conduct global watch, consensus building, and common action. W orld Commission on Environment and Development. Gro Hartem Brundtland, Chairman. Our Common Future. New York: Oxford University Press, 1987. 400 pp. This is a recent and m ost influential report on the environm ent It brought the term, “sustainable developm ent,” into partance. “In the broadest sense, the strategy for sustainable developm ent aim s to prom ote harmony among human beings and between humanity and nature.“

US. Pofecy Bloom field, Lincoln P. The United Nations and U.S. Foreign Policy: A New Look at the N ational Interest. Boston: L ittle, Brown, 1960; revised ed., 1967. 268 pp. The author, who served 11 years in the State Departm ent, adm its that the C old W ar has dispelled many o f the “extravagant” hopes that were once placed in the U.N. for “ending the scourge o f war.” Bloomfield closes with reflections on the ultim ate goal o f a “world order"—including world com­ munity and world government—under the “rule of law."

Soviet Poky Gorbachev, M ikhail S. The River o f Time and the Imperative o f Action. W est­ m inster College, Fulton, M issouri, 6 M ay 1992. Available from O ffice o f Press Relations, Fulton, MO, 65251-1299. This historic address recalls W inston Churchill’s “Iron Curtain" address in 1946. Gorbachev, by now ousted from power in the breakup o f the Soviet Union, reflected on the “missed chance” at the start o f the Cold W ar “to ini­ tiate a work! order different from that which existed before the w ar." The im­ plication, be held, was that by 1992 a sim ilar opportunity could be lo st “An awareness o f the need for some kind o f global government is gaining ground, one in which all members of the world community would take p a rt" Shakhnazarov, G eorgi. 'T h e W orld Community Is Amenable to G overnm ent [upravlyayemo]." Pravda, 15 January 1988, p. 3.



Shakhnazarov, a past president o f the Soviet Political Science A ssociation, was widely recognized as a key advisor to Gorbachev and a source o f “new thinking,•' o f which this daring article is an example. Shakhnazarov adm its that w orld government is theoretically necessary to “save m ankind from per­ ishing,“ but historically, when the idea was m ost popular (after use o f atom ic bombs), it became entangled in U.S. foreign policy.

Mstory Goodrich, Leland. The United Nations in a Changing World. New York: C ol­ um bia U niversity Press, 1974. 280 pp. G oodrich believed that it was neither possible nor tolerable for the U .N . to evolve as the modem state did, in large part, by “physical force.“ “C onse­ quently, we have the problem o f achieving comparable results by co n sen t“ Jenks, C. W ilfred. The W orld beyond the Charter: A Tentative Synthesis o f Four Stages o f W orld Organization. London: Allen & Unwin, 1969. 199 pp. “I believe that we are living through the birth-pangs o f a w orld com m unity and drat the task o f endowing that community with effective political institu­ tions capable of maintaining the peace, entrenching human freedom , and p ro ­ moting the general welfare is the supreme political task o f our tim e and per­ haps o f any tim e.“ M angone, Gerard J. A Short History o f International Organization. N ew Y ork: M cG raw -H ill, 1954; W estport, CT: Greenwood, reprint ed., 1975,326 pp. H ere is a history o f the “developm ent o f international organization along constitutional lines with attention to procedure and law, hoping to indicate a potential, though by no means inevitable, growth toward w orld order.“

UK Geoarol Assembly Peterson, M . J. The General Assem bly in W orld Politics. Boston: A llen A Unwin, 1986. 320 pp. The author investigates why, how, and to w hat degree states ignore the U n it­ ed Nations, particularly its general deliberative organ, the G eneral A ssem bly. In the absence o f a world government to bring order to anarchical w orld s o ­ ciety, argues Peterson, the General Assembly still affects w orld politics b y “filtering“ and “channeling“ the interactions o f sovereign states by its ra le s and institutions. Falk, Richard, and Strauss, Andrew. “Toward Global Parliam ent.“ Foreign A f­ fairs, 80,1 (January-February 2001): 212-20. “One crucial aspect of the rising disaffection with globalization is the la ck o f citizen participation in the global institutions that shape people’s d a ily lives.” The “dem ocratic deficit” is m ost noticeable in the U.N ., WTO, a n d

Appandbt J: Annotated DM ogrophy


IMF. The authors trace the historic shift in power from states to the interna­ tional system o f states, civil society, and global business, list such achieve­ m ents o f civil society as support for lim itations on global warming and the treaty outlawing land mines, address the beginnings o f business cooperation in the U .N .’s G lobal Com pact, and argue that a w orld parliam ent w ould evolve like the European Parliam ent and New D eal legislation preserving capitalism . They d o se with practical reflections for the transitimi.

Pitt, D avid, and W eiss, Thomas G ., eds. The Nature o f United Nations Bureauc­ racies. Boulder, CO: W estview, 1986. 199 pp. The authors come from the “humanistic, liberal m iddle" and "w rite from sor­ row rather than anger about the declining fortunes o f the U.N. They do not w ant its dissolution, even if they want its reform ." The last chapter by Paul Streeten, "The U nited N ations: Unhappy Fam ily," treats the specialized agencies as future m inistries w ithin a lim ited world government, or, failing that, as training grounds for a better career civil service.

Norv-Govwnrrwntal Organizations W eissbrodt, David. "The Role o f International Nongovernmental O rganizations in the Im plem entation o f Human Rights." Texas International Law Journal 12 (1977): 293-320. International nongovernmental organizations (INGOs) are a link between the peoples o f the various states and international organizations, including the U .N . They also link people to still visionary schemes o f an international crim inal court or a world government. INGOs, because o f their legitim acy based on the support o f the people, can point the "finger o f shame" at states reluctant to criticize one another.

Paooatal Safltemwtf of Disputes A zar, Edw ard E ., and Burton, John, eds. International C onflict R esolution: Theory and Practice. Brighton, Sussex: W heatsheaf, 1986; Boulder, CO: L. Rienner, 1986. 139 pp. International conflict resolution has become a sophisticated scholarly disci­ pline, o f w hich this book o f essays is an exam ple. Ambassador M cDonald cautions: “ ‘The international com m unity,’ absent a w orld governm ent, is not in a position to manage or negotiate these suggested changes." The bode is a study o f “Track n diplomacy”—private or citizen diplomacy in support o f official or governmental (Track I) diplomacy. N ortbedge, F. S., and Donelan, M. D .. International Disputes: The Political Aspects. London: Europa Publications for the David D avies M emorial In-



stitute o f International Studies, 1971. 349 pp. Northedge and Donelan professedly aim at finding the “unconscious general wisdom" o f the current practitioners o f statecraft in a w orld w ithout strong central authority. They conclude that, even under an ultim ate w orld govern­ m ent, disputes w ill still need to be resolved by international institutions that are already in existence, and “good statecraft” w ill have to use this m achinery in order to arrive at a more lawful and orderly world. Haas, Ernst B. Why We Still N eed the United Nations: The Collective M anage­ m ent o f International Conflict, 1945-1984. Berkeley, CA: Institute o f Inter­ national Studies, University o f California, 1986. 1(M pp. “To attribute failure to the United Nations and to regional organizations is to endow these entities with a degree of autonomy they do not possess.” The author shows, historically and statistically, that collective conflict m anage­ m ent has bad a respectable rate o f success, though the trend is dow nw ard. Haas closes with his own prescriptions for U.N. reform , which fall betw een the extremes o f world federalism and muddling through. Thakur, Ramesh, ed. International Conflict Resolution. Forew ord by D avid Lange. Boulder, CO: W estview, 1988. 309 pp. This book is a report o f an im portant scholarly conference on conflict resolu­ tion held in New Zealand in 1987. Prime M inister David Lange, w ho had astonished the world by closing his country’s seaports to vessels carrying nu­ clear weapons, concluded that there are ways to avoid or mid conflict w ithout w ar or “system atic appeasem ent” C onflict today is rooted less in disputed national boundaries than in “issues o f equity and justice" within and betw een nations.

Ju d d d Sutttamunf Johansen, R obert C. “U.S. O pposition to the International C rim inal C o u rt Unfounded Fears.” The Joan B. K ick Institute for International Peace Stud­ ies, Policy B rief No. 7 (June 2001). "The founding o f a permanent international crim inal co u rt designed to hold individuals (rather than states) accountable for failing to obey international hum anitarian law, prom ises to become the single m ost im portant interna­ tional institutional advance since the founding o f the United N ations.” Ferencz, Benjamin B. “M isguided Fears about the International Crim inal C o u rt” Pace International Law Review (forthcoming, Spring 2003). The author review s the history o f the founding o f the court and U .S. objec­ tions. He concludes that “realists” cannot com plain that the U .N . C harter has not saved succeeding generations from the scourge o f war, then refuse to strengthen the rule o f law which has proven effective to do so; th at as the

A p p m d xJi Annotated Bfclography


ICC goes into effect, the U.S.A. cannot rem ain an international leader outside the court; that a large m ajority o f the American people (83% according to a survey by the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations) favor recourse to the court to try suspected terrorists, and that alm ost as many (65% ) support the court even if a U.S. president should be accused despite the many safeguards. K atz, M ilton. The Relevance o f International Adjudication. Cambridge, MA: Harvard U niversity Press, 1968. 165 pp. This is a book of lectures addressed to lawyers and the educated public about the slow growth o f international law and its lim ited ability to curb violence and resolve disputes. The analogy w ith m unicipal law, which does perform these functions, is imperfect, for there is no government o f the world, though Katz regards international organizations as “international governm ental o r­ ganizations" and hence a step in that direction. Sofiaer, Abraham D. "Adjudication in the International Court o f Justice: Progress through Realism ." Record o f the Association o f the Bar o f the City o f New York, 44 (1989): 462-92. “A special opportunity seems to be at hand [with the end o f the Cold W ar] to prom ote the use o f the International Court o f Justice (ICJ) in resolving inter­ national disputes." To explain why the ICJ is not meeting world needs, he blam es W oodrow W ilson’s "m essianic” leadership in the "quest for a rule to replace violence in the world."

Ragtoral Agendas Falk, Richard A., and M endkm tz, Saul, eds. Regional Politics and World Order. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1973. 475 pp. This collection of thoughtful essays focuses on the processes o f regional co­ operation and integration as they may contribute to world order—understood as a preferred world where the values o f peace, economic abundance, social justice, ecological balance, and political participation are realized. By the 1990s their expression "new world order” captured the vision o f a world after the Cold W ar. Zacher, M ark W . International Conflicts and Collective Security, 1946-77: The United Nations, Organization o f American States, Organization o f A fri­ can Unity, and Arab League. New York: Praeger, 1979. 297 pp. D isappointm ent w ith universal collective security organizations like the U .N . leads this political scientist to study regional security organizations. Zacher quotes H airy Kissinger, who said, "The United Nations is not a world governm ent,” and presum ably, the regional organizations are not govern­ m ents either, able to settle conflicts by apprehending the individuals accused o f violating the laws.



Dbarmomeft Bloomfield, Lincoln P., and Cleveland, Harlan, eds. Disarmament and the U Ji.: Strategy fo r the United States. Princeton: Aspen Institute for H um anistic Studies, 1978. 78 pp. This policy paper was prepared for official and public discussion p rio r to the U N . General Assembly’s first special session on disarm am ent in 1978. T he authors warn that the U K . forum may pit the Third W orld, anxious to reduce superpower arms but not its own, against the industrialized W est, intent on dam age lim itation and determined to maintain its “defense.” They add that the U.N. cannot be expected to function as a “global government”— w hich is im plied in the goal o f general and com plete disarm am ent under effective in­ ternational control.

Iraem odow lO iyrtinllon» Harrod, Jeffrey. “United Nations specialized agencies: from functionalist inter­ vention to international cooperation?” In Jeffrey Harod and N ico Schrijver, eds. The U.N. under Attack. Aldershot: Gower, 1988, pp. 130-44. The specialized agencies in the U.N. system have been justified as the begin­ nings o f a world state, a realistic device to control power, a liberal interna­ tionalist approach toward cooperation, and a functional step tow ard in terna­ tional peace. By the 1970s, the Third W orld began to resist U .S. and A llied hegemony with its “new orders,” such as the New International E conom ic Order, which have provoked the current political counterattack, accusing U J J . organizations as nothing m ore than “paper m ills,” “docum ent factories,” a n d “talk shops.” This criticism m isses the m ark, H arrod argues. A m ore su b ­ stantial phase o f U.N. reform is still ahead. Keohane, Robert. “The International Energy Agency: State Influence and T ran sgovenunental Politics.” International Organization, 32 (Autumn 1978): 9 2 9 51. The author examines the International Energy Agency (IEA), founded in 1 9 7 4 within OECD in response to OPEC’s control of oil. Keohane finds that tra n s­ national politics is im portant in the IEA for the im plem entation o f p o lic y , but that interstate politics is dom inant for policy form ation, as for the e s ta b ­ lishm ent o f the IEA itself. “Clearly, the IEA is not destined to becom e a s u ­ pranational organization with authority to give orders to governm ents.”

Tele oornmuricortoni Ganley, Oswald H., and Ganley, Gladys D. To Inform or to Control? The N e w Communications Networks. New York: M cG raw -H ill, 1982; N orw ood, N J: AMex, 2nd ed., 1989. 263 pp. Communications has entered a “period o f extrem e dynamism,” w hen n e ith e r

ÂnonfİT i Amûiotod Bblûcrahv ^

^ I R r W




W f H A h % A IV 8 W


nations nor the international com m unity is able fully to control the new technologies or to realize their hill potential to inform their citizens and world society. “M ost o f our stakes are now global," the Ganleys w rite. “But gov­ ernm ents have not gone global."

Food B oyd-O rr Jo h n . "The Food and A griculture Organization, 1943-48." In John B oyd-O rr, A î / Recall. London: M acGibbon & Kee, 1966,157-216. H ere is an account o f the founding o f the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO)by its first director-general, who had high ideals still not realized. The heart o f Lord B oyd-O rr’s proposals was a world fo o d board to make longto m low -interest loans to states, in order to purchase food and agricultural m achinery; to buy and bold surplus stocks for later resale, in order to stabi­ lize prices; and to establish an international authority o f individual experts (business people, scientists, farmers) u n d o supervision by the U.N., in order to cooperate in economic developm ent for the benefit of all peoples. B oydO rr saw this last as a step toward “world governm ent"

Transnational Corporations Ç aplan, Richard. ’T racking Transnationals: United N ations Centre on Transna­ tional C orporations." M ultinational M onitor, 10, 7 -8 (July-A ugust 1989): 12-14. This is a candid, plain-spoken introduction to the U.N. Centre on Transna­ tional Corporations (UNCTC). It was established in 1973 in the wake o f rev­ elations about International Telephone and Telegraph’s (ITT) attem pts to destabilize Chile. By the m id-1980s, the centre still advised states to guard against corporate wrongdoing, but its relation to TNCs was much m ore posi­ tive, since everyone recognized that usually TNCs had positive effects cm de­ velopm ent. Puchala, D onald J., and Fagan, Stuart I. "International Politics in the 1970s: The Search for a Perspective.” International Organization, 28 (1974): 2 4 7 66. Although w ritten during the Cold W ar, the authors sense that "international politics has changed structurally, procedurally, and substantively" since the Cuban m issile crisis. By the m id-1970s, the role o f non-state actors in world politics was very evident, and among these were international organiza­ tions (IO s), m ultinational corporations (MNCs), and nongovernmental organi­ zations (NOOs). Puchala and Fagan argue that these are contributing to inte­ grative international processes, though "we are nowhere near world govern­ m en t”



UK Gonforanc* on Trade and Development M ichalak, Stanley J. Jr. The United Nations Conference on Trade and D evelop­ ment: An Organization Betraying Its M ission. W ashington, DC: H eritage Foundation, U K . Assessment Project Study, 1983. 78 pp. H ere is criticism , o f a so d very influential in the U nited States during the 1980s, o f UNCTAD’s "straggle to replace the existing international econom ic system with a new, collectivist order.” At work here is not a spirit o f trying to find some middle way between laissez faire capitalism and centralized eco­ nom ic planning by a unitary w orld state but American isolationism m ani­ fested in an attack on such common international institutions, like UNCTAD, that a diverse worid has been able to create.

Human Rights Annan, Kofi. Year 2000 M illennium R eport The U N . secretary-general here plainly articulates the m eaning o f hum an rights. "N ational sovereignty m ust not be used as a shield for those w ho w antonly violate the rights arid lives o f their fellow human beings. In th e face o f mass murder, armed intervention by the Security Council is an option that cannot be relinquished.” Donnelly, Jack. Universal Human Rights in Theory and Practice. Ithaca, NY: Cornell U niversity Press, 1989. 29S pp. The author admits that human rights are historically conditioned—there is n o eternal list o f such innate human characteristics, like that o f the five physical senses. Readers who are puzzled about the nature of "rights" w ill find this an informed and reflective account. Donnelly concludes realistically that, “in a n international system where government is national rather than global, hum an rights are by definition principally a national m atter.” Kaufman, N atalie H. Human Rights Treaties and the Senate: A H istory o f Opposition. Chapel H ill, NC: U niversity o f N orth C arolina Press, 1990. 256 pp. Readers who wonder why the United States, with probably the best record o n human rights o f any country in the worid, continually resists ratification o f treaties agreed to by a m ajority o f states w ill find the reasons here. T he a u ­ thor argues that opposition has been essentially "political”—reservations b e ­ ing a "legalistic strategy in an essentially political game.” M cDougal, M yres S., Lasswell, Harold D., and Chen, Lung-chu. Human R ig h ts and World Public Order: The Basic Policies o f an International Law o f H u ­ man Dignity. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1980. 1,016 p p . “[Tlhe contemporary world arena,” argue the authors, "exhibits an increasing­ ly viable constitutive process o f authoritative decision which, though it h a s not yet achieved that high stability in expectations about authority and in d e-

Anoonrİif 1 A fflotaf^d Dfcfcooroohv


gree o f control over constituent m embers that characterizes the internal pro­ cesses o f certain national communities, still offers in more than rudim entary form all the basic features essential to the effective making and application of law on a global scale.” Riesm an, W. M ichael. “Sovereignty and Human Rights in Contemporary Inter­ national Law.” American Journal o f International Law, 84 (1990): 866-76. Sovereignty has passed through several incarnations: as the locus o f power when m edieval Christendom broke up, as the authority o f dynastic kings, as the consent of the people. The Universal Declaration o f Human Rights pro­ vided in A rticle 21(3): ”1116 w ill o f the people shall be the basis o f the au­ thority o f governm ent” Pending creation o f “centralized institutions” to pro­ tect human rights, Riesman calls for implementation o f existing procedures for redressing violations.

Erivkonmant Schneider, Jan. W orld Public Order o f the Environment: Towards an Interna­ tional Ecological Law and Organization. Foreword by M yres McDougal and J. Alan Beesley. Toronto: University o f Toronto Press, 1979. 319 pp. “The protection and preservation o f the earth-space environment is essential­ ly a public order problem ," begins the author, “in the sense that it affects the w hole global com m unity and its m ultiple and interpenetrating com ponent com m unities.” Schneider is aware that the logic o f environmentalism points to “world government” or “federation," but she regards this as m atter “for po­ litical philosophers extending way beyond the aspirations o f the present inquiry."



AUTHOR'S W ORKS Baratta, Joseph Preston. “W as the Baruch Plan a Proposal o f W orld G overn­ ment?” International History Review, 7 (November 1985): 592-621. ------- . “O n the Regime o f Fear.” The International Year Book and Statesm en's Who's Who. London: Thomas Skinner D irectories, 1986. -------. “W orld Federalism” and “Grenville Claik.” World Encyclopedia o f Peace. Ed. by Ervin Laszlo and Jong Youl Yoo. Oxford: Pergam on P ress, 1986; 2nd ed., 1999. -------. Strengthening the United Nations: A Bibliography on U.N. Reform a n d W orld Federalism. W estport, CT: Greenwood, 1987.351 pp. ------- . "Internationalism in the Truman Administration." Harry S Truman E n­ cyclopedia. Boston: G. K. Hall, 1989. ------- . Verification and Disarmament: An International Arm s Control V erifica­ tion Agency or International Disarmament Organization. W ashington, DC: Center for U.N. Reform Education (CURE), No. 4 ,1 9 8 8 . 60 pp. ------- . International Peacekeeping: H istory and Strengthening. W ashington, DC: CURE, U.S. Institute o f Peace (USIP), No. 6 ,1 9 8 9 . 120 pp. ------- . International Arbitration: Improving Its Role in D ispute Settlem ent. W ashington: CURE, USIP, No. 7,1989. 56 pp. ------- . Human Rights: Improving U.N. M echanisms fo r Compliance. W a sh ­ ington, DC: CURE, USIP, U.N. Reform M onograph N o. 8 ,1 9 9 0 . 109 pp. ------- . The W orld Federalist Movement: A Collection o f M ainstream Journals. New York: Norman Ross, 1990. 253 fiche + 2 reels + 6 guides. ------- . “G renville Clark, W orld Federalist.” Annals o f the Lothian F oundation, 1991. London: Lothian Foundation Press, 1992. ------- . “The K ellogg-B riand Pact and the Outlawry o f W ar.” Encyclopedia o f A rm s Control and Disarmament, Ed. by Richard Dean Burns. N e w York: Scribner’s, 1993. 2:695-705. ------- . “The International Authority behind Peacekeeping." Peace and th e S c i­ ences (International Institute for Peace, Vienna), 25 (Septem ber 1 9 9 4 ): 19-21. ------- . The United Nations System: M eeting the W orld Constitutional C risis. Oxford: ABC-Clio; New Brunswide, NJ: Transaction Press, 1995. S l l pp. ------- . 'international Federalism.” Peace and Change, 24 (July 1999): 3 4 0 —7 2 (special edition on history o f federalism after 50 years).

Index to Volum e 2

A ABC plan, 462, 464, 473-74, 492, 571-74, 579-81 A bolition o f w ar, 299, 302, 313-14, 3 8 9,450, 509, 519, 539, 545, 568 Acbeson, Dean, 4 1 8 ,4 2 8 ,4 9 5 A cheson-Lilientbal plan, 310,612 Achilles, Theodore C., 525 Adams, Samuel, 401 Adenauer, Konrad, 532 A dler, M ortim er J., 303, 319, 320, 324, 380, 384, 386, 436, 490, 498. 528, 551,60 2 ,6 0 5 : “angel” a great idea but not “w orld govern­ m ent,” 497; w orld governm ent m ust com e in five years, 3 1 8 ,5 2 8 29 A dler, Ota, 341 A frica, 516, 519, 522, 639-41, 650, 655 Agenda fo r Peace, 534,536 A ggression, 370, 418, 425, 434, 485, 494, 528, 531, 533 A ggressive instincts: not satisfied by total war, 302 Ahmedabad (India), 414 Alabama, 558 A lbertini, M ario, 590,614

Albright, R. M ayne, 3 6 2 ,4 4 8 ,5 4 7 A lliances, 300, 382. See also N orth Atlantic treaty (and NATO) Allison, Graham T., 650 A ll-U nion Society for the D issem ina­ tion o f P olitical and S cien tiß c Knowledge, 440 Alternatives, 587 Alternatives to Anarchy, 614 Altman, Georges, 404 Altrincham, Lord, 618 Altschal, Frank, 541 Aly, Bower, 602 Amendments: o f U.N. C harter, 3 5 8 59, 362, 375, 452, 462, 469, 471, 505, 533-34, 541, 545, 558-61, 584; o f U .S. C onstitution, 378, 3 9 5 ,4 4 5 ,4 5 3 ,4 5 6 , 530, 541, 561; o f world constitution, 531,546 America First, 458,492 Am erican A ssociation for the U nited N ations, 366, 374,474, 510 American Century, 423,427 American Crusade for W orld Govern­ m ent, 377, 381-82, 385-91; de­ stroyed by W allace's candidacy for présidait, 392. See also Crusade for W orld Government



American Legion, 3 5 1 ,3 7 0 ,4 7 3 ,4 9 1 93 American Peace Society, 450 Am erican Revolution, 446, 450, 477, 512,528; standards for world feder­ ation, 532 A m ericans for D em ocratic A ction, 3 5 6 ,4 3 0 ,4 3 2 A m erican S overeignty C am paign Fund, 493 Am ericans United for W orld Govern­ m ent, 351 Am erican V eterans Com m ittee, 303, 351, 356, 370, 385, 396,493 Amnesty International, 522 Amram, Philip, 456,477 Anarchism (philosophical), 598,600 Anarchy (international), 302, 321,364, 375-76, 400, 407, 423, 441, 443, 466, 497, 501, 529, 532,551, 553, 602, 621, 643, 652; ended by rule o f law, 366 A natom y o f Peace, 303, 342, 344, 346, 611, 641; translations, 6 2 2 23 Anderson, John, 511 Anderson, Niels, 412 Andrews, Burton, 602 Andrews, Paul Shipman, 373,456 A nglo-French union, 617 ,6 2 2 ,6 2 5 Annan, Kofi, 536-37, 658; U.N. is at a fork in the road, 537 Anti-communism, 325, 330, 364,370, 373, 379, 382, 397, 421-22, 4 2 5 26, 429, 431-33, 488, 497, 518, 524, 529, 612. See also Loyalty program A nti-world government, 354-55, 395, 4 5 6 ,4 8 9 -9 4 , 604, 609, 625-30 Apollo 11, 537 Appeasement, 430,467 Apsey, Lawrence, 547 Arant, Douglas, 541 Arbitration, 532,660

Arce, José, 635 Argentina, 358,635 Arkansas, 466,559 Arms control, 510, 529 Arms race, 307, 330, 353, 373, 4 1 2 , 429, 468, 528-29, 552: w ill fo rce Russian regim e to collapse, 358 Armstrong, Ham ilton Fish, 477 Armstrong, Patrick, 502, 518 Aron, R obert 615 Article 51. See North A tlantic treaty A rticles o f C onfederation, 304, 3 66, 582 Arrogance of power, 425 Artzybasbeff, Boris, 491 A sheville conference, 349, 352, 3 54, 4 4 8 ,4 9 0 Asia, 478, 503, 516, 631-34 Asimov, Isaac, 602 Association o f Los Alamos S cien tists, 303, 307 A ssociation o f Scientists fo r A to m ic Education, 306,310,311 Association to U nite the D em ocracies. 522,525. See also Federal U nion A tlantic alliance, 333, 4 2 1 -2 2 , 4 5 7 60, 462, 465, 467, 528, 530. S ee also North Atlantic treaty Atlantic charter, 425,564 A tlantic Council o f the U nited S ta te s, 525 A tlantic union, 309, 329, 363, 3 7 0 . 447, 450, 462, 4 6 4 -6 5 , 4 6 9 -7 2 , 480, 487, 523-24, 5 8 0 -8 1 , 6 0 0 , 607, 611-13, 630: anti-Russian bias, 373, 524; ideal turned into a w eapon o f the Cold W ar, 5 2 4 ,6 1 0 ,6 1 2 ; would insult the poor, th reaten th e Soviet U nion, w eaken th e U .N ., and tend tow ard war, 4 6 0 ,4 7 0 -7 2 , 524; would lead later to free w orld g o v ­ ernment, 470

Index to Volum» 2

A tlantic Union Committee, 4 6 2 ,4 6 9 72, 522-26, 609, 628 A tlantic u n it» resolution, 524-25 A tom ic (A) bomb, 300, 304,316,355, 4 1 7 ,4 2 8 ,4 3 8 , 450, 4 5 9 ,4 6 0 ,4 7 2 , 486, 539-41, 602; good new s o f dam nation, 323; Russian, 463-65, 528 A tom ic coercion, 373,438 A tom ic Energy Com m ission: U .N ., 305, 308, 310-11, 328, 363; U.S., 308, 311 A tom ic fe a r m otivation o f world fed­ eralists, 312, 323, 331, 450, 4 7 2 73, 535, 609; not sufficient m oti­ vation, 316, 330, 520, 528, 532, 660 A tom ic scientists, 299, 303-05, 3 07OS, 312-14, 345, 384, 441, 471, 500; depoliticization of, 311; realized world government was im­ plied. 312,611; two goals o f civilian domestic con­ trol and comprehensive internation­ al control, 310 A tom ic Scientists o f C hicago, 303, 308, 310 A ttlee, Clem ent, 331, 368, 615, 618, 625 A uriol, Vincent, 410 A ustin, W arren, 365,368, 372 A ustria, 478 A very, J. B. Jr., 502 Azar, Edward E., 653

B B -17, 399 B -2 9 ,4 7 9 B -36, 368,428 Bahâ’f faith, 619 Bailey, Sidney D., 642 Baker-M cGovern amendment, 511 Balance o f power, 372,473,643


Ball, George, 622 Ball, Joseph H., 566 B aratta, Joseph Preston, 522, 533, 587, 597, 660 Baratta, Mary Florence, v Bamaby, Frank, 615 Barr, Stringfellow, 320, 324,345,377, 379-84, 390-98, 499. 529, 543, 551, 555, 603 Barraclough, Geoffrey, 615 Barrast, Gilles, 555 Barsegov, Yuri, 626 Baruch, Bernard, 299,477 Baruch plan, 305, 309, 313, 327, 336, 358, 370, 375, 387, 418, 428-29, 452, 472-73, 506, 531, 602, 613: proposal o f world government, 660 Bases (strategic), 373,428,479 Bass, Perkins, 542 Bass, Robert P., 539, 541 Baunsgaard, Hilmar, 519 Beethoven, Ludwig von, 491 Beginning or the End, 354 Belgium, 355 Benedict, Stephen, 3 26,359,362, 381, 383-84, 390, 406, 547 Benes, Edvard, 344,367 Bentham, Jeremy, 598 Berdyayev, Nicolay A., 626 Beres, Louis René, 603 Berlin blockade and airlift, 328, 372, 375, 379, 399, 402, 409, 42 2 ,4 2 5 , 4 3 3 ,478-79, 528 Berrigan, Dan and Philip, 521 Bertrand, Maurice, 527,533,648 Bethe, Hans, 305-06 Beveridge, W illiam, 332,615 Bevin, Ernest, 331-32, 337, 355, 368, 378-79, 387,615 Beziers (France), 414 Bikini tests, 428, 531 B ill o f rights and duties, 316, 427, 456, 546, 553, 558, 561, 621 Billion, Jean-Francis, 616



Binding triad, 650 Biological warfare, 307 Blackett, P.M .S., 308 B laine, A nita M cCormick, 345, 3 7 7 78, 383, 391-94, 396, 430, 499, 501 B lake, M ildred, 354-55, 362, 381, 384, 387, 391, 495, 497, 547 Bloomfield, Lincoln P„ 6 0 3 ,6 5 1 ,6 5 6 Blum, John M orton, 422 Blum, Léon, 440 Bogdanov, O. V., 627 Boggs, Hale, 477,581 Bohr, Niels, 609 B oité, C harles, 303, 356, 396, 493, 543,603 Bolton, Frances P„ 472 Börgese, Elisabeth M ann, 337, 415, 4 8 7 ,4 9 7 -9 8 , 501-02, 515, 603 Borgese, G iuseppe Antonio, 315-30, 346, 363, 379, 384, 386, 388,391, 421-22, 426, 491, 497, 505, 510, 530, 551, 605 Bosco, Andrea, 621 Boulier, Abbé, 413 Bourdet, Claude, 404 Bourgeois culture, 439 ,6 2 6 ,6 2 9 Bourne, Francis S., 455 n, 482-83 B outros-G hali, B outros, 534, 536, 648 B oyd-O ir, Lord (John Boyd Orr), 332, 339,410, 503, 512, 515,616, 657 Boyle, Francis A., 642 Brandis, Henry, 448 Braun, W ernher von, 308 Brent, Abraham Rodrigues, 338,616 Breton André, 404 Bretton W oods organizations, 534,565 Brewster, Kingman Jr., 543 Brezhnev, Leonid, 521 Bricker amendment, 492,510 Bridges, Styles, 544 Bridgman, Raymond, 450 Brinton, Crane, 604

Biodie, Bernard, 355 Broneer, Cari, 457 Brosseau, G race L. H., 492 B rotherhood o f m an, 382, 399, 406, 411,435 Brown, H arrison, 307-09, 346, 361, 379, 391-94, 410 Brown, Theodore E., 385,389 Browning, Gordon, 502 Brucan, Silviu, 627 Brugmans, Hendrik, 3 4 1 ,4 4 0 ,6 1 6 Brundtland, Gro Harlem, 651 Buchanan, Scott, vi, 379, 384, 3 8 8 92, 397-98, 4 2 3 ,4 2 6 ,4 9 8 , 532 Bull, Hedley, 643 Bulletin o f the Atom ic Scientists, 306, 311, 588-89 Bundy, M cGeorge, 319,604 Burnham, jam es, 354 Bums, James B., 547 Burton, Harold H., 566 Burton, John, 653 Business, 317, 355, 383, 518 B utler, J.R.M ., 616 Byrnes, James, 428-30 Byron, W illiam, 385 C Cabot, Henry B .. 3 5 6 ,4 5 6 , 494, 542. 547 C alifornia, 357, 431, 452. 454, 456. 460,471, 562, 644 C alifornia plan, 378, 4 4 5 -4 6 . 448, 452, 456-60. 489, 561-62 Campaign for U.N. Reform, 514 Campaign few W orld G overnm ent, 338, 378, 384 Camus, Albert, 4 0 4 ,4 0 8 Canada, 355,519 Canadian W orld Federalists, 519-21 Canfield, Cass, 477,496, 547 Capitalism , 359, 361, 371, 416, 4 2 7 28, 434, 439, 442-43, 448, 548. 628

Index Io Volum» 2

Çaplan, Richard, 657 Carey, Jam es B., 356,446 C arlsson, Ingvar, 533-34,649 C arnegie Endowment for International Peace, 510,533 Cam esale, Albert, 650 C am ey, Fred, 335, 338, 341, 343,499 Carr, Edward Hallen, 616 C arroll, M arie J., 542 C arter, Richard, 385,504 C assin René, 616 C atholic A ssociation for International Peace, 356 C atling, W illiam E ., 555 C ecil, Lord (Robert Cecil), 334 C enter for the Study o f D em ocratic Institutions, vi, 319, 398, 498, 508 Central Intelligence Agency, 479,610 Century o f the Common Man, 427 Changing Our Ways: Am erica in the New World, 533 Chaudhuri, Sanjib, 504,631 Chen Lung-chu, 658 Chiang K ai-shek, 493 C hicago com m ittee. See Committee to Fram e a W orld Constitution Chicago constitution. See Preliminary D raft o f a W orld Constitution Chicago Tribune, 325-26,393 C hilders, Erskine, 533-34 C hina, 347, 373, 465,4 7 6 , 479, 4 8 5 86, 493, 502, 510, 519 Chinese Revolution, 300,486 Chirac, Jacques, 536 Christian Science M onitor, 385 C hurches, 302, 3 55-56, 383, 610, 620-21 C hurchill, W inston S., 331, 339, 342, 365, 368, 379, 387,440, 617,622: Iron curtain speech, 428-29, 651. See also Council o f Europe; Euro­ pean Union C iardi, John, 489


Citizens Committee for U.N. Reform, 363, 579-80, 628 Citizens o f the World, 398 C ity-state giving way to nation-state, 322 Civil Society Forum, 535 Clapper, M rs. Raymond, 547 Clark, Edward T., 299, 338, 341, 343, 346-47, 381 Clark, G renville, 299, 300, 316, 3 1 9 20, 322, 329 333, 349-50 352, 358-59, 361, 364-66, 373, 381, 384, 4 3 0 ,4 4 2 ,4 4 5 , 4 5 2 ,4 5 6 ,4 6 1 , 466-67, 481, 487, 489, 498, 5 0509, 529, 531, 533, 539, 542, 6 0 1 02, 604, 617, 627, 641, 660: great American and citizen o f the world, 508-09; faith in the w ill and intel­ ligence of individuals, 509 Clark, Joseph S., 511, 517 Clarke, Andrew A. D., 515,519-22 Class struggle, 440-41 Claude, Inis, 329,643 Clayton, W ill L ., 469, 477, 523, 525 Cleveland, Harlan, 648,656 Clifford, Clark, 432 C oalition on N ational P riorities and M ilitary Policy, 511 Coffey, 1.1., 627 Coira, Louis E., 368 C old W ar, 299, 323, 328, 332, 336, 344, 349, 370, 373, 4 1 6 ,4 1 8 ,4 2 1 , 428, 432, 451, 467-68, 473, 4 7 9 80, 486, 500-01, 512, 524, 5 2 8 29, 531, 612, 629: conflict about the nature o f justice on which the inevitable w orld gov­ ernm ent would be based, 317, 319, 330, 430, 440-41, 528, 557; defeated federalist movement, 360, 426, 465, 487, 497, 505, 530-31, 651; end of, 533,535,602; federalists as principled dissenters



from, 528; manufactured crisis, 434; popular movement to reverse, 379; U.N. as a weapon of, 358 C ollective security, 3 0 6 ,4 7 3 -7 5 ,4 8 5 , 643, 655: it was to protest the fu­ tility o f collective security that fed­ eralism was bran, 496 Collins, Victor, 338-41, 550 Colonization, 326, 330 Colorado, 559 Combat, 404-05,415 Cominform, 2 9 9 ,4 1 8 ,4 3 8 , 631 Comintern, 4 2 9 ,6 0 0 Com m ission to Study the O rganiza­ tion o f the Peace, 474, 508, 621, 628 Committee for Constitutional Govern­ m ent, 490-91 Com m ittee on a Sane N uclear Policy, 511 Committee to Fram e a W orld Consti­ tution, 303, 314, 315-30, 335, 344, 346, 353, 359-60, 363, 370, 378-79, 383-86, 462, 481, 487, 497-98, 500, 551, 555, 574, 582, 587, 601, 605, 610, 617, 642: m ost substantial intellectual contri­ bution to world federalism, 315 Common Cause, 315, 319, 324, 32829, 335, 359, 363, 379, 382, 385, 587: what can the m atter be, 497 Common Responsibility, 535 Commonwealth (British), 471,599 Communism, 3 1 7 ,3 2 6 ,3 8 2 ,4 2 1 ,4 3 1 , 442, 448, 489-90, 498, 548, 628: fundam ental conflict w ith w orld federalism, 411; one of two great ideas in world to­ day, 389; until Communism under Bolshevik leadership had historically worked itself out, there could be no world federal union, 529. See also Com­

m unist party Com m unist party, 305, 3 08-09, 317, 326, 339, 341-42, 346, 364, 367, 383, 391-93, 403, 407, 410, 4 1 2 , 418, 424-25, 428, 4 3 0 -3 5 , 4 3 7 , 459, 465, 471, 485-86, 492, 4 9 4 , 496, 509, 524: agent o f a foreign power, 394; bad w orld governm ent p o litic s , 394,436; functioning international ag en cy , 370; voluntary relinquishm ent o f m ono­ poly power, 529 Community: created by law, 302, 353; organized as transition to w o rld government, 306,400. See also W orld com m unity Conant, James B., 306-07 Condon, Edward U ., 311 Confederation, 339, 342^-43, 501, 598. 608: not working w ell, 536 Conflict resolution, 653-54 Congo, 510 Connally, Tom, 4 7 6 ,4 7 9 , 567 Connally amendment, 510 Connecticut, 355, 454, 460, 558, 560, 562 Conscientious objectors, 3 0 3 ,4 1 6 C onstitutional am endm ent to p erm it U.S. participation in a w orld gov­ ernm ent, 378, 395, 445, 4 5 3 , 456, 530, 541, 561, 602 Constitutional convention: Philadelphia, 313, 316, 381, 4 8 0 81, 501, 531, 613; U .S., 453, 456, 472; world, 386, 390,405, 414. See also Peoples’ convention Constitutional Education L eague, 490, 609 C onstitutional Foundations o f W orld Peace, 319,533,649 C onstitutional problem : o f U .N . at


Indax to Volum* 2

sta rt o f C old W ar, 366-67; o f w orld, 597,608, 660 C onstitution fo r W orld Government, 504 C ontainm ent, 2 9 9 -3 0 0 , 310, 321, 349, 358, 361, 363-64, 370, 422, 428, 452, 464, 481, 486, 498, 528, 612: no perm anent solution, 369. See also Truman doctrine C onvergence, 628-30: m ixed econo­ m ies, 524 Conway, Edward A., 356,542 Cooperation. See International cooper­ ation Cope, Harley, 493 C orbett, Percy E., 605,645 C otcos, G illes, 338, 362, 547 C ort, David, 641 C osm opolitanism (rootless or home­ less), 437-41, 529, 626-29: ideo­ logical banner o f American imperi­ alism capped by idea o f world gov­ ernm ent, 440. See also Proletarian intemflrirmalism Cosyn, M aurice, 337 C ouncil for Petitions, 535 C ouncil o f Europe, 379,472,523 Council on Foreign Relations, 510 C ousins, Norman, 350, 352, 355,362, 384-85, 391-92, 511, 515, 522, 542, 547, 605 C ranston, A lan, 346, 362, 384, 448, 452, 457, 459, 467-69, 487, 491, 496, 511, 543, 547 C risis (world), 305, 3 0 7 ,4 1 1 ,4 3 1 -3 2 , 4 3 4 ,4 8 7 , 528, 597,616, 626,660: drifting tow ard unparalleled cata­ strophe, 305 C rusade for W orld Governm ent, 299, 324-25, 333-35, 359, 363, 377, 391, 395, 625 C uba, 355, 358, 636 C uban m issile crisis, 507, 525,657 C ulbertson, Ely, 363, 370, 372-73,

393, 425, 462, 464, 473-74, 492, 500, 571, 574 Curry, W illiam B.. 617,641 Curtis, Lionel, 599, 618 Czech coup, 300, 319, 328, 338, 344, 359, 367-68, 375, 425, 433, 467, 528 C zechoslovakia, 338-39, 344, 367, 379

D D ’Amato, Anthony A., 646 Damiani, Hugo, 341, 550 Dancer, Cliff. 385 Daniel, Cuthbert, 384 Dante Alighieri, 599 Dardanelles, 365 Daughters o f the American Revolution, 300, 458, 489, 492 D avis, Garry, 337, 399-419, 502, 517 Davis, M eyer, 39 9 ,4 0 1 ,4 0 6 Dean, Vera M icheles, 627 Decolonization, 510, 520 Defense, 299, 307, 358, 393,487: by guardians o f w orld federation, 316, 491; in law and order, 301,423,467; m ilita ry , 3 0 2 -0 3 , 329, 369, 372-73, 412, 442, 459, 464, 467, 474, 496, 530, 577-78; none against atom ic bom bs, 310, 313 Defining Purpose: The United Nations and the Health o f Nations, 533 Democracy: 326, 361, 387, 401, 469, 498, 504, 531-32: federal union o f dem ocracies, 309, 373, 382, 462, 470-71, 524, 529, 534, 536, 557, 569; government based on the consent o f the governed, 536; liberal vs. economic, 524,526,529; two elem ental forces struggling to organize the international commu-



nity—totalitarianism and democra­ cy, 557; w ithin and betw een states, 534, 536. See also M embership Dem ocratic party, 357, 364, 378, 392, 422, 425, 428, 431. 434, 448, 492, 561 De-Nazification, 300 Denmark, 3 7 7 ,3 8 6 ,4 1 4 De Russen, Alan, 618 D eterrence, 507: best substitute for world government, 355 Deutsch, Karl, 605 Development. See Economic develop­ m ent Dewey, Thom as E., 365, 390, 4 2 1 22, 4 2 5 ,4 3 1 ,4 5 1 Dick, Edison, 356, 362,547 Diedisheim, Jean, 627 Dies, M artin, 459 D isarm am ent, 340, 365, 426, 438, 441, 452, 466-67, 473, 491, 506, 510, 522, 529, 546, 558, 568-69, 6 0 7 ,6 1 1 ,6 1 8 ,6 2 7 ,6 2 9 , 656,660: substitu tin g “disarm am ent” for “enforceable law " overlooks the basis for reliable disarmament, 486; unilateral, 529 Dodd, Thomas, 547 Donelan, M . D ., 653 Donnelly, Jack, 658 Don Quixote, 307 Dorn, W. J., 368 Dougherty, Jam es E., 643 Douglas, Helen Gabagan, 473-74 Douglas, Paul, 462,477, 578, 582 D ouglas, W illiam O., 356, 361, 383, 605 D raft Treaty Establishing the European Union, 523 D ublin conference, 350, 430, 508, 539-44,604: there can be no peace w ithout order, no order w ithout law, 540

Du Bois, W .E.B., 418 Duclos, Pierre, 618 D ulles, Alan, 477 D ulles, John Foster, 365, 422, 4 9 8 , 525, 606, 611, 638 Dunayeva, E., 627 Duncan, Frances, 499 Dunlop, N icholas, 5 1 1,522 DuPont, Lam ont and Irene, 492 E Eagleton, Clyde, 4 7 4 -7 5 ,6 0 6 Eames, Edward W „ 542 Eastern Europe, 429, 437, 452, 479: sticking point in w orld p o litic s, 429 East-W est relations: breakup o f W orld W ar n alliance, 321,323. 3 3 0 ,3 3 2 , 412, 418, 441, 451, 471, 480, 4 96, 531; general settlem ent, 317, 348, 359, 364-66, 372, 3 7 5 -7 6 , 381, 387, 394, 429, 444, 467, 506, 508, 512, 519, 604 Eaton, Charles A .. 369, 373, 575, 578 Economic bill o f rights, 4 2 4 -2 5 ,4 3 4 Economic developm ent, 316, 3 7 1 ,3 7 7 , 397, 4 7 1 ,4 7 9 , 495, 510, 518, 520, 522, 531,658: sustainable develop­ ment, 651 Economic Security C ouncil, 535 Eden, Anthony, 355,368 Education, 309, 312, 350, 387, 3 8 9 90, 392, 397, 412, 422, 434, 4 7 6 , 493, 506, 5 08-09, 553: n o th in g does m ore for education than a po­ litical candidate who risks an e le c ­ tion by taking a stand on th e issues, 436, 450, 453, 483, 5 28, 531 Een Verden, 618 Egypt, 346 Eichelberger, C lark, 366, 372, 396, 477 E instein, A lbert, 301-14, 336, 356,

Index Io Volum» 2

361. 363. 384. 393. 408. 410. 413, 417, 426, 488, 490, 503, 517, 606, 641: only advocate o f w orld government to receive a con­ siderate reply from Soviet scien­ tists, 304, 441-43, 631 E isenhow er, D w ight D ., 346, 349, 361, 378, 505 Elazar, D aniel J., 593,606 E lections to a peoples’ convention, 333-35, 345, 360, 381-82, 3 8 6 88, 391, 442, 448, 499-504: fraudulent, phoney, 390; special state conventions to nom i­ nate and elect, 390; syndical election, 389,391 E lectoral regions, 315-16, 321-22, 377, 385. See also W eighted vot­ ing Em ergency Com m ittee o f the Atomic Scientists, 304-05, 310-11, 356, 363, 368, 391, 393, 395-96: edu­ cation o f m ankind on the im plica­ tions o f atom ic energy cannot be solved on an emergency basis, 312 Empire: alternative to world federation, 328; A m erican, 354-55; B ritish, 331-32. See also Im perialism Enforcem ent o f world law on individu­ als, 337, 349, 362, 366-67, 369, 423, 442, 466-67, 469, 496, 498, 506, 510, 541, 545-46, 548, 558. See also International law; Interna­ tional police England. See G reat Britain Eniw etok, 311, 350, 368 Entitlem ent quotients, 650 E nvironm ental protection, 510, 522, 533, 535, 619, 651, 659 E quality o f persons, 303, 322, 414, 4 3 8,442, 529: is another cause for w ar if put before liberty. See also Sovereignty L ’État de siège, 404


Etzioni, A m itai, 626 European Communities, 525, 622. See also European Union European federation. See European Union European U nion, 299, 301, 331-32, 339-40, 342, 344, 379, 472, 491, 509, 523, 536, 554, 570, 585,600, 615, 618, 619, 622, 625: danger o f Russian invasion on for­ mation o f so powerful an adversary, 387; if Europe can unite cannot the w hole world, 5 3 2,620,621; U.S. support for, 462-63 European Union o f Federalists, 333 Evans, Archibald, 618 Evans, Luther H., 511 Evans, Upsure, 352,394 Evatt, H erbert V.. 4 0 5 ,4 0 8 -1 0 ,6 0 6 F Fabian society for federalists, 383,397 Fadiman, C lifton, 384-85 Fagan, Stuart I., 657 Faith, Purpose, and Power, 496 Falk, Richard A., 329, 533, 644, 649, 652-53,655 Farm er, Fyke, 338, 378, 381, 389, 501-04 Fascism , 4 3 4 ,4 3 9 ,4 7 3 Federal Bureau o f Investigation, 308 Federalist, 496,588 Federalist Papers, 316,535,599 Federalist: A Political Review, 590 Federalizing the federalists, 336, 3 4 1 43, 383, 397, 415, 488, 500, 515, 521: why could w orld federalists never cooperate, 406 Federal Union: B ritain’s, 333, 335, 338, 530,615, 617,622; U .S., 379, 523, 530, 587, 612 Federal Union News, 342,588 La Fédération, 337



Federation o f A m erican Scientists, 304-08,310-11 Federation o f Croats and Bosnians, 336 Fellow ship o f Reconciliation, 336 Ferencz, Benjamin B., 654 Ferguson, Charles W ., 344 Ferguson, Homer, 320,642, 570, 574, 584 Fermi, Enrico, 306 Field, M arshall Jr., 343 Field program o f popular movement, 383,487, 494-95 Findley, Paul G , 523, 614 Finkelstein, Lawrence S., 643 Finletter, Thomas K., 350, 373, 493, 542 Fischer, Louis, 544 Fisher, M rs. Richard T., 542 Fisher, Roger, 646 Flanders, Ralph, 574 Florida, 4 5 4 ,4 6 0 ,5 5 8 Flynn, John T., 490 Food and A gricultural O rganization, 339, 410, 554, 616, 657 Force, 577: function to gain tim e for moral ideas to take root, 529. See also Enforcement Ford, Gerald, 578 Ford Foundation, 498, 509,527 Foreign policy. See Policy Formalism, 4 3 9,629 Forrestal, James, 428 Forsberg, Randall, 607 ’48 Magazine, 385 Foundation for W orld G overnm ent, 377, 391-98,426, 529,612: world governm ent w ill be built through cooperation w ith m any persons m ore alarm ing than M r. W allace, 394; half o f $1 m illion collected by U .S., 395 Foundations o f the W orld Republic, 497 Founding Fathers, 318, 349: set stan­

dards for world federalists, 532 Four Freedoms, 427 Fourteen Points, 425 France, 303, 339, 341, 346, 355, 386, 397, 399-419,433, 532, 561 Freedom. See Liberty Freedom and Union, 3 6 3 ,5 2 5 ,5 8 7 French Revolution, 512,615 Freud, Sigmund, 302 Friedrich, Carl, 607 Fromkin, David, 646 Fromuth, Peter, 533, 651 Le Front H um ain des C itoyens d u Monde, 337 Fuchs, Lawrence, 362, 384, 393, 395, 495, 547 Fulbright. J. W illiam , 303, 425, 4 5 1 , 462, 567, 570, 580, 585 Fulton, Jam es B., 368 Functional cooperation, 3 3 9 ,4 8 8 , 549, 554, 603, 618, 656: federalism by installm ents, 622 G G allirotti. G iulio M ., 649 Gandhi, M ohandas K., 347, 377, 382, 386, 404-05, 521, 632, 637. S e e also Nonviolent resistance Ganley, Gladys D. and O swald H ., 6 5 6 Gannett, Frank, 491 Gaulle, Charles de, 525 Gaulle, Jacques de, 341 Gbedemah, Kim la A gbeli, 515 Genocide convention, 479 George, W alter, 566,580 Georgia, 558 Germany, 302, 334, 358, 3 6 5 -6 6 ,3 7 1 , 379, 394, 399, 414, 428, 452, 4 65, 468, 478, 531-32 Ghose, Sri Aurobindo, 632 Gibraltar, 365 Gide, André, 408 G illette, Guy M ., 564, 580 Girard, P., 550

Indtx lo Volum» 2

Gladwin, Lord, 618 G lobal compact, S18 G lobal economy, 536,623 G lobal governance, 534-37,615, 624, 648-49 G lobal problématique, 645 G lobal Report, 591 G lossop, Ronald J„ 607,649 G oldin, Daniel, 537 Goldm an, Ralph M., 643 G oldsm ith, H. H., 589 G oodm an, Elliot R., 628 G oodrich, Leland M „ 644,652 G orbachev, M ikhail, 524, 529, 630, 651-52 G ottw ald, Klement, 367 G raham , Frank P„ 356, 462, 477, 578, 584 G rassroots movement, 327, 360, 3777 8 ,4 9 4 , 498-501, 526, 532, 536 G reat books, 379, 397,497 G reat B ritain, 303-04, 331-34, 3 6 5 66, 377, 386, 399, 440, 446, 503, 506, 531-32 G reat pow ers, 304, 371, 399, 407-10, 4 1 7 ,4 2 3 ,4 6 4 ,4 6 9 , 528,602: una­ nim ity, 300, 323, 423-24, 468 Great Rehearsal, 364,613 G reece, 346, 357-58, 409, 431, 452, 478-79 G reen, Alan, 362,547 G reen, W illiam, 477 Greenwood, Arthur, 615 G riessem er, Tom O tto, 335, 338, 341, 3 4 3,542 Gromyko, Andrei, 367,529 G rom yko plan, 424, 529 Guam, 350 G uérard, Albert, 320,324,551 H H aas, Ernst B., 644,654 H abicht, M ax, 336-37, 515,618 H aegler, R olf Paul, 619


Haekkemp, Per, 515 Hale, Leslie, 503 Hale, Robert, 480 Halpem, Frieda F„ 628 Hamilton, Alexander, 351,535,599 Hammarskjöld, Dag, 607 Hanrieder, W olfram F., 644 Harriman, W. Averell, 428 Harrington, Donald, 511 Harris, Errol E., 649 Harrod, Jeffrey, 656 Hart, H.L.A., 646 Hart, M erwin K„ 490-92 Hart, Norman, 343 H arvard U niversity, 316, 320, 447, 4 8 9,506 Harwell. W . A., 501-03 Hatch, Carl A., 566 Hays, Brooks, 357, 369-70, 461-63, 465-66, 480, 571, 578 Hecht, Selig, 305 Henry IV, 598-99 Heritage Foundation, 491 n Hersey, John, 354 Herter, Christian, 506, 525, 578,607 Hickenlooper, Bourke B., 311 Hickerson, John D., 477 Higenbotham, W . A., 306, 308 H ill, Lister, 566, 578, 580 Hiroshima, 354 Hiroshima and Nagasaki, 301,304-05, 315, 318, 320, 354, 508, 517, 529, 602 Hiss, Alger, 395, 396, 433,465 H istory, 300, 304, 312-14, 319, 321, 330, 364, 371, 373, 387, 397, 399, 406, 411, 413, 421, 429, 436, 445, 447, 460, 464, 468, 474-75, 477, 480-82, 490, 499-501, 519, 557, 599, 614, 616, 619: being made today, 403; burden o f this history, 475,478; choosing the Founding Fathers o f the W orld Republic, 349;



conclusion, 527-37; course between world war and world government, 417; dilem m a o f partial vs. universal u n k » , 464; every step forw ard because some people had courage, 382,411; federalism after SO years, 660; greatest political fight in American history, 383; has passed by sovereign states, 380; m yth, a proposal to history, 318, 379; people ready to follow national leaders, 436; short history o f the future, 613; watershed, 328,380. See also Opportunity H itler, Adolf, 334, 3 5 8 ,394,418,458, 468, 619, 622 Hobbes, Thomas, 302 Hobbs, Conrad, 542 Hobson, Henry W ., 356 Ho Chi M inh, 417 Hocking, W illiam E , 320-21 Hoffinann, W alter, 514 Hogan, W illard N ., 607 Hogness, T. R., 305 Holcombe, Arthur N ., 4 6 1 ,4 7 7 ,6 0 7 H olliday. W . T., 352, 373, 383, 446, 6 0 8 ,6 4 2 H ollins, Harry, 446,511, 518 Holt, George, 384, 390,608 Holt, Ham ilton, 356, 524, 608 Holt, John, 512-13 Hone, M ary, 446 Hooker, Gertrude S., 315 Hoogendijk, W itte, 338-39,550 House of Representatives: hearings on w orld federalist resolutions, 300, 349, 3 6 9 -7 6 ,4 6 3 -7 6 ,4 8 2 -8 3 House Un-Am erican A ctivities Com­ m ittee. 311, 395. 459, 488

Housing, 533 Hoyland, John, 3 3 5 ,6 1 9 ,6 3 2 Huddleston, John, 619 Hudson, Richard, 591,650 Hull, Cordell, 476,481 Human rights, 316, 328, 344, 371, 402, 463, 4 7 6 ,4 9 2 ,5 0 8 , 5 1 0 ,5 2 0 22, 533, 535, 548, 553, 612, 617, 660: national sovereignty n o shield for those w ho violate rights o f fel­ low human beings, 658 Hum ber, R obert Lee, 362, 4 4 7 -4 8 , 456,5 4 7 Humber resolution, 3 5 5 ,4 4 6 -4 9 ,4 5 3 , 528, 557-58 Humphrey, H ubert, 384,477, 578 Hutcbenson, Palm er, 542 H utchins, R obert M ., 300, 303, 3 1 5 25, 361, 378, 380, 383, 398, 4 2 5 , 461, 497-98, 510, 551, 601, 6 05, 608,6 3 4 Hutchinson, P a u l 608 Huu, Nguyen, 516 Hydrogen (H ) bomb, 3 1 0 -1 1 ,4 6 5 , 528

I Ideal, 299-300, 302, 3 1 8 -1 9 , 3 4 3 , 401-03, 409, 416, 440, 442, 4 4 5 , 477, 497, 508, 514, 532: r e d blooded world federalist, 378 Ideological preparation, 3 4 2 ,3 8 3 , 397, 498, 529, 531: restatem ent o f th e federalist goal in today’s w orld is needed, 520. See also E ducation; Foundation for W orld G overnm ent Illinois, 448, 454, 500 Illum inati, 491 n, 611 Imago Mundi, 398 Imm igration, 316,471 Imperial federation, 523 Imperialism: alleged policy o f U .S ., 304, 327, 354-55. 359, 425, 427, 4 3 8 -3 9 , 440, 443, 466, 496, 529, 627;

Index to Volum» 2

Am ericans as conquerors tragically m iscast, 466; danger o f Russo-Am erican imperi­ alism as step toward w orld federa­ tion, 426; m ilitary or economic, 427 Inagaki, M orikatsu, S 17,634 Independent W orking G roup on the Future o f the U nited N ations, S27, 533 India, 347, 377, 385-87, 414, 428, 477, 561 Indiana, 448,454 Individuals. See Enforcement; Human rights; Liberty; Law; W orld law Indonesia, 478 Influence: m oving outside academ ic discus­ sion into realm o f international po­ litics, 332, 379; o f Russia in a fair plan, 352; on national politics, 300, 318-19, 328-29, 332, 342, 357, 363, 370, 378, 3 8 2 -8 3 ,4 3 6 ,4 5 2 ,4 9 4 ,4 9 7 ; prestige lost, 487; w ithin federalist m ovem ent, 315, 329, 342, 3 6 3 ,4 4 2 ,4 9 7 Innis, Harold A., 320, 324, 551 Institute for Advanced Study, 303 Institute for International Order, 511 Intellectuals, 302, 320, 3 9 9 ,4 1 3 ,4 2 7 , 645: institute o f science, education, and culture to bring intellectuals into a m ore responsible role for governing the world, 317 Intercontinental ballistic m issile, 506, 508,528 Interest See National interest In ternational C am paign fo r W orld G overnm ent 338 International control o f atomic energy, 303, 305-06, 336, 363, 388, 417, 429, 443, 452, 462, 4 6 7 ,4 7 8 ,5 2 4 , 529, 531, 541, 549, 554, 572,602,


612: failure, 308, 313,349; goal o f w orld governm ent 308-10, 312, 441, 623 International cooperation: friendly competition, 430; o f scientists, 311; o f states, 339, 371, 374, 397, 423-24, 430, 442, 466, 523, 535, 565, 629, 648, 656 International C ourt o f Justice, 467-68, 510, 519, 655. See also W orld courts International C rim inal C ourt, 463, 510, 646, 654 Internationalism , 301, 350, 355-56, 3 8 3 ,4 3 0 ,4 4 0 ,4 6 5 ,4 7 6 ,6 2 8 : to­ day all internationalists are m axi­ m alists, 518, 531 International law , vi, 527, 614, 6 4 5 48,659: enforced on states, 373; no socialist nor bourgeois international law, 630 International M onitary Fund, 534 International organization, 301, 316, 374, 427, 434, 443, 464, 477-78, 480-81, 527, 534, 602, 642-45, 656: four stages, 652 International Organization, 591 International Peace Academy, 511,522 International police (armed) force, 302, 337, 363, 365, 370, 373, 423, 462, 465, 467,473, 506, 546, 548, 554, 558, 568-69, 572: police distin­ guished from arm ies, 404,407. See also Enforcement International territory, 4 0 2 -03,413-14 International terrorism , 537 International Trade Organization, 479 International tribunals, 536. See also W orld courts; W orld equity tribunal Iowa, 454 Iran, 4 2 8 ,4 7 8 ,4 9 7 Iraq, 533



Isely, Philip, 500,608 Isolationism , 361, 387, 421, 427, 443, 438-39, 463, 476, 481, 490, 509, 523, 532 b ra d . Fired, 619 Israelyan, V., 628 Ita, lyo, 303-04 Italy. 409. 418, 433, 465, 531, 561, 599 J Jackson, Henry M , 472, 578 Jackson, Lady (BarhamW ard), 619 James, W illiam , 421,431 Japan, 347, 358, 365, 414, 465, 478, 517, 531 Japanese W orld Federalists, 516-17, 634-35 Jaspers, Karl, 620 Javits, Jacob, 4 6 9 ,471-72, 578 Jay, John, 535, 599 Jefferson, Thomas, 351, 387,433—34 Jenks, C. W ilfred, 652 Jensen, M errill, 608 Jessup, John J., 544 Jessup, Philip C., 608, 646-47 Jews, 302, 341, 3 9 7 ,439,441 Jinnah, M . A., 386 Joad, C.E.M ., 346 Johansen, Robert C., 5 3 3 ,6 4 9 ,6 5 4 Johnson, Lyndon B., 496, 512 John XXm, Pope, 620 Jolliot-C urie, Frédéric, 413 Joseph, Frances L„ 338, 341 Jouvenel, Bertrand de, 620 Joyce, jam es Avery, 620 Judd, W alter H., 357, 369-70, 372, 374, 461-63, 469-70, 480, 571, 578, 580 Junior Chamber o f Commerce, 356 Jurisprudence, vi Justice. 323, 3 8 3 ,4 0 9 ,4 1 4 ,4 7 0 , 518, 531, 6 0 4 ,6 4 5 ,6 4 8 : governm ent the instrum ent to

establish, 536; means reconstruction after w ar, p ro ­ tection o f econom ic rights, e n d to racism , equitable social and e co n o ­ m ic development, 317; no peace w ithout justice, no ju s tic e w ithout law, no law w ithout g o v ­ ernm ent, 299, 310, 315, 329, 3 4 5 , 369, 400, 4 0 5 ,4 2 3 , 4 5 1 ,4 6 6 , 4 7 8 , 536, 545; peace and ju stice stand to g e th e r, 316, 536; universal, 319, 330, 520, 551 w hat C old W ar w as about, 317, 319, 3 3 0 ,4 3 0

K Kagawa, Toyohiko, 517 Kahler, Erich, 317,320, 324, 551 Kahn, Herman, 507,608 Kamp, Joseph E.. 4 9 0 -9 2 ,6 0 9 K ’ang Y u-w ei, 599 Kant, Immanuel, 530, 5 9 8 -9 9 ,6 0 7 Kashmir, 478 Kassebaum amendment, 532 Kato, Shunsaku, 517 n, 634 Katz, M ilton, 655 Katz, W ilber G .. 320, 324, 551 Kaufman, N atalie H., 658 Kedrov, B. M ., 439,628 Kefauver, Estes, 462, 477, 502, 571, 580, 584, 609 K ellogg-Briand pact, 621,660 Kennan, George, 3 5 8 ,4 4 5 ,6 1 2 Kennedy, John F., 4 5 1 ,4 7 7 , 507, 509, 578 Kennedy, Paul, 533 Kenny, George C , 368 Kentucky, 559 Keohane, Robert O ., 6 4 4 ,6 5 6 Keys, Don, 520-21 Khrushchev, N iltita, 506 Kilgore, Harley M ., 580 Kim, Samuel S., 5 3 3 ,6 4 7 , 649

Index to Volume 2

Kim ber, Charles, 622 King, M artin Luther Jr., 521 Kirkby, Anker, 337, 342 K issenger, Henry, 655 Knös, Gunnar, 338 K och, Henri, 33 7 ,3 4 1 ,3 4 3 , 346 Kobn, Hans, 609 Koo, W ellington, 634 K orea. 3 5 8 -5 9 ,4 0 9 ,4 4 3 ,4 7 9 K orean W ar, 3 9 8 ,4 1 3 ,4 1 6 ,4 1 8 ,4 2 1 , 460-61, 465, 480, 485-90, 4 9 3 97, 503, 509, 512, 517, 528, 602: civil w ar w ithin W estern civiliza­ tion, 501; marked a id o f popular world feder­ alist movement, 488,495; not a term inal event, 505 Kostyichenko, Gennadi, 441 K othari, Rajni, 589 Krasner, Stephen D ., 644 Kraus, Gerry, 502-04 K rehel, Peter, 344 Kropotkin, Peter, 600

L L abor unions, 317, 355, 383, 416, 4 2 6 -2 7 ,4 3 1 , 4 3 4 ,4 4 6 Labour party, 331-32,625 Ladd, W illiam, 450 Landis, Jam es M ., 320-21 Lang, Gordon. 334,338, 341,379 Lang, Reginald, 338, 362, 381, 384, 547 Langley, W inston E., 637 Lannung, H ennod, 515 Lanneroux, Jean, 341, 343, 346, 515, 5 5 0 ,6 2 0 LassweU, Harold D ., 647,658 Laszlo, Ervin, 620,660 L atin A m erica, 429, 474, 516, 616, 635-39 Laursen, Finn, 518,6 2 0 Law: reaching to individuals, 299,337, 340, 362, 366-67, 373-74, 376,


403, 407, 414, 423, 442, 466-67, 496, 527, 541, 545, 548, 553, 601: m ight o f w eaker united in com ­ munity against the stronger, 302; pow er to accom m odate even Rus­ sians and Americans, 508 Law o f the Sea, 498, 510, 522,604 Lawrence, W. H .,424 Layton, Christopher, 620 Leach, James A., 511,533 leadership: choice o f U .S. to m aintain leader­ ship in arm s race rath er than strengthen U.N. on m odel o f w orld federation, 529; lack o f enlightened national leader­ ship to take the cause to the people, 505, 508-09, 527, 530-31 o f federalist movements, 325, 329, 342, 346-47, 351, 359, 361, 3 6 3 64, 380, 393-94, 402, 407, 410, 417, 426, 433, 436, 494-96, 512, 514, 532; o f public opinion, 353, 361, 476, 500, 512, 520, 532; provides the difference when public opinion is slack, 483 U .S., 310, 329, 332, 361, 374-75, 411, 424, 430, 436, 460, 464-65, 4 6 9 ,4 7 4 ,4 8 0 -8 3 ,4 9 5 , 507, 529; w ithout national leadership UW F cannot get into the policy debate in W ashington, 495, 500 League o f Nations, 3 0 1 ,334,436,457, 524, 601: failure, 300, 339,465, 531; no central pow er to maintain w orld peace, 302 League o f sovereign states, 323, 339, 501,515,530,: cannot prevent con­ flict, 304, 540 League to Enforce Peace, 360 Lebanon, 346,478 Leddy, J. Francis, 515




Lehman, M rs. R obot, 356 Lenin, V. L, 600 Lens, Sidney, 609 Leserman, Philip, 547 L et’s Join the Human Race, 398 Levering, Samuel, 362, 384,547 Lewis, G yde A., 493 Libeial education, 380,397,436 Liberalism , 424, 428, 430-31, 446, 450, 492, 529, 644-45, 653: paradox o f support for the state to pro tect individual freedom yet acceptance o f anarchy in relations between states, 623. See also Realism Liberty, 303, 311, 3 1 9 ,4 0 7 ,4 2 8 ,4 4 6 , 466, 470, 489, 528-29, 534, 557, 577, 622: law the true ground of, 508,611. See also Universality Lie, Trygve, 3 7 5 ,4 0 5 ,4 8 0 Liebman, Joshua Loth, 356 Liga ß r Weltgierung, 410 Lim ited w orld government, 323, 32627, 333, 349, 351, 364-65, 407, 423, 465-68, 496, 506, 508, 540, 649: inadequate from m axim alist per­ spective, 359-60,378; lim ited powers adequate to prevent war, 545, 558; lim ited to status quo, 340; U .S. trying to lock up w eapons that m ight defeat it, 340,381. See also M inim alism ; U nited W orld Federalists lim its to Growth, 642 Lincoln, Abraham, 475, 509, 536 Lindgren, Claire, 338, 360, 384, 390, 396 Lindstrom , Ralph, 362, 547 Lippmann, W alter, 299,641 “L ittle Assembly” (Uniting for Peace) proposal. 328, 359, 3 7 1 ,4 4 3 ,4 9 5 Litvinov, M axim, 437

Lloyd, Georgia, 338 Lloyd, Mary M averick, 3 4 2,384 Lobbying, 350, 3 7 7 ,4 4 6 -4 7 ,4 9 1 : why should W ashington p o lic y m akers listen to a lobby w ith o u t substantial members, 495 Lochner, Louis, 396 Lodge, Henry Cabot, 457 Lodge, Henry Cabot Jr., 465, 578 Long, R. Russell, 578 Lorentz, Pare, 353 Lot (France), 413-14 Lothian, Lord (Philip K err), 600, 616, 621 Louisiana, 558 Lovelace, Denis, 518 Lovett, Robert, 422 Loyalty program, 311, 3 9 5 ,4 0 0 -0 1 Luatd, David E. T., 6 2 1,644 Luce, Henry, 422-23 Luxembourg declaration, 552-55 Lysenko, T. D ., 440

Me M cAllister, G ilbert, 616 M acArthur, Douglas, 4 8 5 -8 7 ,4 9 3 -9 4 , 609 M cCarthy, Joseph R., 580 M cC arthyism , 395, 433, 4 6 5 , 4 8 8 , 509,529 M cCloy, John J., 507 M cC loy-Zorin agreem ent, 507, 510, 629 McCoy, David, 499 M cCutcheon, John D ., 547 M cDougal, M yers S., 6 4 7 ,6 5 8 M acDougall, Curtis, 422 M cllwain, Charles H., 320, 324, 551 McKeon, richard, 3 2 0 -2 1 ,3 2 4 ,6 0 5 McMahon, Brian, 578 McNamara, Robert, 512 McWhinney, Edward, 609

Indue 1o Volum» 2 M M adariaga, Salvador de, 620-21 M adison, Jam es, 316, 322, 331, 533, 599 M ahan, Alfred Thayer, 529 M ahony, Thomas, 352,362, 381,384, 387, 391, 4 5 0 ,4 5 6 ,4 9 4 , 539,542, 547 M aine, 3 5 5 ,4 5 4 ,4 6 0 , 562 M ajority rule, 358, 370,443 M aloney, Thomas A., 457 M angone, Gerald J., 6S2 M anhattan project, 3 0 7,320,354 M ann, Thomas, 490 M ansfield, M ike, 571,578 M arc, A lexandre, 337, 341, 555, 615, 621 M arcantonio, V ito, 490 M archand, Guy, 621 M aritain, Jacques, 621 M arkovitz, Norman, 422 M arshall, G eorge, 368, 371-72, 374, 422: predicted R ussian collapse w ithin 6 w eeks o f H itler’s attack, 358 M arshall, John, 501 M arshall plan. 319, 336, 340, 345, 3 5 8 -5 9 , 361, 36 5 -6 7 , 369-71, 383, 425, 433, 438, 463, 469-70, 4 7 2 ,4 7 6 ,4 7 9 , 523, 528, 566,629: conceived outside o f U .N ., 310, 366,422, 469, 474 M arsilius o f Padua, 322 M arx, Karl. 325, 342 M arx ist-L en in ist theory, 429, 440, 4 4 2 ,4 4 5 -4 6 ,6 4 5 M aryland, 558 M asaryk, Jan, 338, 367,433 M assachusetts, 355, 357, 446, 4 5 0 5 2 ,4 5 4 ,4 6 0 , 465, 558-59 M assachusetts Com m ittee for W orld Federation, 3 5 1 ,4 5 0 ,4 5 2 ,5 3 9 M assachusetts Institute o f Technology, 313


M asters, Dexter, 609 M astny, Vojtech, 629 M atsuoka, Komakichi, 517 M atthews, Alan F., 525-26 M atthews, John A., 523 M axim alism , 300, 315-16, 323, 326, 353, 359-60, 362, 378, 382-83, 388, 467, 470-72, 488, 522, 531, 603, 60S: challenge to m inim alists, 505-06; w ar aim , 425. See also M inim al­ ism; Powers; Justice M ayer, Joseph, 379 Mayne, Richard, 622 M azrai, Ali A., 650 M eadows, Dennis L., 642 M eiklejohn, Alexander, 397 M ellon, Andrew W ., 379 M embership, 481,614: dem ocracies only, 309, 326, 466, 470; merger, 531 universal, 326, 337,466, 545, 548, 553 M em bers o f C ongress fo r Peace through Law, 511 M endlovitz, Saul, 5 8 9 ,6 4 5 ,6 5 5 M ethodist C om m ission on W orld Peace, 356 M eyer, Cord Jr., 303, 327, 346, 3 5 0 53, 355-56, 358-64, 372-74, 3 8081, 384, 387, 390-92, 395-96, 400-02, 406, 412, 426, 464, 467, 477, 491-92, 499, 511, 543, 609, 641: joined CIA, 487,610 M ichalak,Stanley J. Jr., 658 M ichigan, 448,454 M iddle East, 365,510,655 M iddle W orld, 381,388,396-97. See also Nonaligned movement M igel, J. A.. 362, 542 M igration. See Imm igration M illard, Everett Lee, 513



M iller, Lynn H., 645 M illington, Ernest, 334 M inim alism , 316, 323, 326-28, 353, 362, 3 8 8 ,4 6 5 -6 8 ,4 8 8 , 540: a ll th at is practical in interim , pending amendment, 531; did not m eet worid’s needs, 518; pow ers adequate to prevent war, 545, 553; too much for America, too little for w orld, 388, 605. See also Limited w orld governm ent; M axim alism ; Powers M innesota, 313, 355,454 M inorities, 316: organized can defeat unorganized majority, 370 M iracle: event with probability o f less than 10%, 306 M issouri, 355 M itrany, David, 622 M odrzhinskaia, E. D., 629 M olotov, V yacheslav M ., 367, 489, 629 M onnet, Jean, 528, 532, 622 M onroe doctrine, 457,479 M ontreux declaration, 339-41, 5 4 8 5 0 ,6 2 6 M ontreux conference, 335-45,359: organization faulty, leadership lack­ ing, spirit prophetic, 342 M oral law: applies to nations as w ell as men, 540 M ore perfect union, 299, 437, 445, 501, 524, 529 M orgenthau, Hans, 610,624 M orrison, Philip, 308-0 9 ,6 1 0 M orse, Philip M ., 305 M orse, W ayne, 477,578 M osler, Herman, 647 M owter, Edgar A nsel, 362, 495, 542, 547 M umford, Louis, 490 M undialization, 413-14,5 0 2 ,5 1 7 M undt, Karl, 370. 571, 579

M unich, 300 Murrow, Edward R., 410 M ussolini, Benito, 497 M yth, 318, 379, 416

N Nardin, Terry, 647 Nash, Vernon, 3 5 2 ,4 9 5 -9 6 ,6 4 1 Nasser, Gamal Abdel, 640 N ational A ssociation for the A dvancem art o f Colored People, 356 N ational Com m ittee for A tom ic E du­ cation, 306, 310-11 National Educational A ssociation, 356 N ational interest, 461, 464, 482, 496, 642,651: interests o f the w orld as a whole, 505 N ationalism , 321-23. 342, 383, 402, 427, 439, 4 5 9 ,4 6 1 , 474, 476, 490, 508, 512,423, 532, 603, 605, 609, 628: great heresy o f modern tim es, 322; m ust give way to federalism , 407, 551 N ational Science F oundation, 308, 313 n National security. See Security National sovereignty. See Sovereignty N ation-state, giving way to regional or world federation, 322 NATO. See N o th A tlantic treaty Naval Academy, 379 Nazi scientists, 307-08, 312 Negroes in m ovem ent, 385, 389, 426, 43 Nehru, Jaw aharlal, 299, 3 4 6 -4 7 , 381, 385, 396, 503, 634 Netherlands, 355 Neutral conference for continuous me­ diation, 396 Newcomb, Hanna, 610 New Deal, 428,436 New Hampshire, 558

Index Io Volum* 2 New International Econom ic O rder, 518 New Jersey, 3 5 5 ,4 5 4 ,4 6 0 , 558,562 N ew Republic, 430 New York, 355, 360, 365, 448, 454, 500 New Zealand, 355,373 N iebuhr, Reinhold, 320-21, 324, 529, 6 0 5 ,6 1 0 N igeria, 503-04 Nightm are c f Am erican Foreign Poli­ cy, 495-96 N ixon, R ichard M ., 357, 369-70,473, 521, 571 Nkrume, Kwame, 639-40 N on-aligned movement, 381 Non-governmental organizations, 653 N onviolent resistance, 382, 404, 411, 619 N orth A tlantic C onsultative Assem ­ bly, 463, 523 N orth A tlantic treaty, 333, 363, 3 6970, 372, 378, 399, 407, 459, 470, 474, 476, 479, 482, 523, 5 2 8 , 577-78, 580; N A T O : 370, 4 63-65, 469, 473, 4 7 6 ,4 8 2 , 523, 525, 536: announcement that world of nations is form ally split into two arm ed cam ps, 412; A rticle 51 was not provided in an­ ticipation o f division betw een the great powers, 468; exercise o f A it 51 in U.N. Charter, 328-29, 370-73, 375, 382, 462, 4 6 5 ,4 6 8 , 576-77, 582-84; only a stop-gap m easure to gain tim e for giving U N . real and effec­ tive power, 373,464; revolution in A m erican foreign policy, 530 tem porary expedient, 464, 467, 473, 512 N orth C arolina, 4 4 7 -4 8 , 454, 460,


558, 562 North Dakota, 313-14,558 Northedge, F. S., 653 Northwestern U niversity, 499 Norway, 377,386 N ovorossiisk (U.S.S.R.), 414 Noyes, Chester, 412 N uclear war, 299, 3 1 1 ,4 8 1 ,4 8 6 , 507, 604, 610, 650: fear no longer moves the public, 520 Nye, Joseph S., 644, 650 Nyerere, Julius K., 640

O Oak Ridge W orld G overnm ent Com­ m ittee, 311, 384, 603 Ogilvy, Stewart, 385 Ohio, 448, 454 Oklahoma, 355 ,4 7 1 ,5 5 8 , 560 Oliver, Stauffer, 490 Olsen, H alt, 337, 341 O 'N eill, Thomas P., 452 One w orld, 309, 338, 383, 405, 422, 4 2 8 ,4 3 0 ,4 3 9 -4 0 ,4 4 4 : One Europe, One W orld, 620. See also Two worlds One World, 513,641 One W orld or None, 304, 382, 417, 529,609: plenty o f tim e, 529 Operation Paperclip, 307 Oppenheim, Lassa, 647-48 Oppenheimer, J. R obot, 311 O pportunity (historic), 316, 319-21, 328, 332, 387, 412, 435-36, 461, 464,4 8 1 -8 2 , 528, 602: choice between world federation and anarchy and war, 365; disappearing, 343, 358, 374, 421, 494,651. See also Timing Oregon, 559 Organization o f American States, 480 Organization on Security and Coopera­ tion in Europe, 536



Orwell, George, 622 Our Common Future, 651 Our G lobal Neighborhood, 533-35, 649 Outlawing atomic weapons, 417-18 Ozaki, Yukio, 516

P Pace, W illiam R., 522 Pacifism, 301,438, 645: is not enough, 600,621; sound, 302-03 Paine, Tom, 401 Pakistan, 377, 386 Paladino, Santi, 338 Palestine, 328. 333, 3 6 6 ,4 0 2 ,4 7 8 -7 9 Palme, Olaf, 610 Panama, 365 Parliamentarians for W orld Order Cater, for Global Action), 511, 522 Parliamentary approach, 343-44,549 Parliam entary Group for W orld Gov­ ernment, 504, 518,616 Paim elee, Foster, 338, 500 Partisans o f Peace, 410,412^-13,417, 496, 512 Patterson, Chat, 385 Patterson, R obert P., 428, 469, 477, 523 Patton, Jam es B., 356,511 Pauling, Linus, 305 Peace. See W orld peace Peace ballot, 334, 450-51. See also Elections Peacekeeping forces, 463, 476, 510, 660 Peace or Anarchy, 609,641 Peace Research Reviews, 592 Peck, George T., 319 Penn, W illiam , 600 Pennsylvania, 355,448 People’s Century, 421 Peoples’ convention, 324-26, 330, 332, 338-39, 345, 359-60, 3 6 2 -

64, 377, 3 8 0 -8 3 , 399, 4 0 5 -0 6 , 4 1 1 ,4 1 4 ,5 0 0 -0 4 : appeal to the sovereign peoples o f the world, 322,382; bypasses states, 325, 332, 360, 382, 389; demise, 395; discredited if unguided by national leadership, 531; ended in British disdain, A m erican defiance, and international bew ilder­ ment, 504; Geneva (1950), 503-04; resultant constitution to be subm it­ ted to states, 386; sounds like a conspiracy— co u ld lead to hell, 389,532; unofficial, 318, 325, 333-34, 385, 387, 549 Pepper, Claude, 477, 564,570, 578 Petfcins, John A., 611 Perpetual peace, 5 98-99, 601, 6 0 7 , 616 Peter the G reat’s w ill, 367 Petitions, 355 PfaltzgrafT, Robert L. Jr., 643 Philadelphia convention, 313, 3 16, 381,480-81, 501, 531, 613 Philippines, 355 Pierre, Abbé (H enri G ro u ès-P ierre), 331, 341, 344, 346, 404, 502 Pilgrimage o f Western M an, 379 Pinder, John, 509,6 2 1 -2 2 Pitt, David, 653 Planetary Citizens, 521-22 Plan fo r Peace, 300,506 Plan in Outline, 334-35, 385 Plank, Max, 303 Planning agency, 3 1 6 -1 7 ,4 3 4 Pocono Pines conference, 346, 364, 377, 382-91, 426, 501 Point four, 479, 495. See also E co­ nomic development Poland, 3 0 9 ,4 3 8 ,4 8 6 , 518, 5 2 8 ,6 0 2

Index to Volume 2

Policy: British foreign, 332; Soviet foreign, 332, 338-59, 363, 371, 393, 418, 424, 428, 437-38, 465, 602, 626-30, 651; U .S. foreign, 300, 308, 318, 332, 349, 357-59, 365, 371, 375, 407, 412, 418, 422, 4 2 4 ,4 2 8 ,4 3 0 ,4 3 8 , 456, 461-63, 467, 478, 498, 510, 528-29, 534, 602, 611, 628, 651; w orld fed eralists', 308-09, 3 4 9 50, 360, 392,479, 487, 512, 519; alternatives for W est—preventive w ar, arm ed peace, w orld govern­ m ent, 368; both American and Soviet policies to blam e for C old W ar, 364-65, 428; federalists’ policies naïve, 479; fundam ental objective to develop the U.N. into a lim ited w orld feder­ ation. 4 6 2 ,4 6 4 ,4 6 7 ,4 8 2 ; n a tio n al po licy aim s only to lengthen interval betw een w ars, 306; once committed to world federation, A m erican policy w ill be given a controlling purpose and direction, 467; W allace's critique, 364; w orld federation as true goal o f U .S. foreign policy aiming a t last­ ing peace and security, 464-65. See also S oviet U nion; U nited States o f America Political action. 300, 349-50, 383-83, 400, 403, 4 45-60, 461-83, 491, 528 Politics: choice is not betw een capitalism and communism, but between fed­ eralism and pow er politics, 448, 548, 552;


French readiness for new politics o f world citizenship, 402,416-17; great novel work o f statecraft is be­ fore us, 535-36 not until a m ajor political figure appeals to the voters w ill political education on world government be­ gin in America, 436, 528; party, 390; popular (electoral), 349-50, 3 8 2 83, 408, 416, 422, 431-33, 4 3 5 36, 442-43, 450, 453, 458, 4 6 1 8 3 ,4 9 1 -9 2 , 532; practical, 299, 300, 318-20, 324, 335, 344, 346, 349-50, 366, 372, 382-83, 389, 400, 403, 405, 4 0 8 09, 417, 426, 4 4 5 -6 0 , 4 6 1 -8 3 , 514, 528, 533, 535; psychological conditions, 625; three prospects for world, 534; two elem ental forces are struggling to organize the international com­ m u n ity — to ta lita ria n is m and democracy, 557; W allace was fighting world federal­ ists’ political battles, 426-27. See also Elections Politis, N icolas Socrate, 622 Polls. See Public opinion Popular (m ass) m ovem ent. See H eld program; Grassroots; Peoples' con­ vention; U nited W orld Federalists, W orld Republic Portland (Maine), 414 Posen, D aniel Q., 313-14, 384 Potter, Neal, 511 Pow er o f citizen action, 509; o f states, 303, 643; perponderance of, 309, 370-71, 425, 610, 612 Pow er politics, 464, 474, 548, 602, 627: returning as w orld federation was rejected, 3 4 0 ,3 4 5 ,4 4 3 ,6 2 4 Powers, Harold J., 457



Powers: delegation of, 366, 374, 388, 456, 464, 481, 501, 510, 528, 531, 535, 540, 546, 548, 558, 561, 601,605; lim itait in national and w orld gov­ ernm ent to safeguard people from tyranny, 407; m inim al (for security), 326, 333, 337, 359-60, 362, 388, 407, 468, 531, 545-46, 553-54, 558; minimal cannot deal with real prob­ lems, maximal are too distant, 605; m axim al (for peace and justice), 3 15-16, 326, 3 59-60, 382-83, 531; preponderance in A tlantic union, 470, 610, 612 Preliminary Draft o f a World Constitu­ tion. 300, 314, 315-30, 344, 379, 4 1 1,498, 504, 508, 551, 604,642: “American” draft, 325,327,329; premature, 327; process undemocratic, 327-28; translations, 617,634; w ill alw ays rem ain prelim inary, 605 Prentice, Colgate, 362, 547 Preparedness, 3 0 0 ,3 1 0 ,3 7 0 ,3 7 3 ,4 6 7 , 530: pursuit o f national objectives through w arlike means w ill dom i­ nate m ore and m ore our public life and poison our youth, 443 Pressure group, 349-50, 389, 404, 416 Preventive diplomacy, 476 Price, Chartes C., 511 Priest, A J.G ., 351-52, 362, 381,384, 387, 391, 543, 547 Privat, Edmond, 503 Progressive party, 319, 364, 377, 384, 388, 392, 416, 422-23, 430-36, 445, 489, 509: w orld governm ent plank, 423-25

Prokofiev, Sergey, 438 Proletarian internationalism , 440, 6 2 7 , 629 Proudhon, Pierre-Joseph, 600 Public opinion, 3 3 3 -3 4 , 346, 353, 364, 386, 399.400, 402, 416, 419. 4 50-51, 453, 464, 469, 4 8 1 -8 3 . 493, 500, 520, 528, 530-31, 5 5 9 60: G allup polls, 357; never 1-50 m illion adherents, 530; ready enough, 4 8 2-83,530; sentim ent, 331, 399, 445, 4 7 5 -7 6 , 482; unstructured (not leading to re a l w ill), 483 Publius. 593 Puchala, Donald J., 657

Q Q uota Force plan, 3 6 3 ,3 7 0 ,5 7 2 -7 4 Qureshi, M oeen, 527 R Rabinowitch, Eugene, 307, 3 1 2 ,6 1 1 Racism, 317, 319, 3 2 6 ,4 3 4 ,4 3 9 ,4 7 1 Ramphal, Shridath, 533-34, 649 Rand, Robert G , 4S6 Randolph, Jennings, 563 Ransome, Patrick, 622 Rawnsley, N o d and V iolet, 338 Realism, 300, 304, 318, 4 2 8 -3 0 , 445, 462, 465, 480, 486, 497, 5 2 7 -2 8 , 530, 553, 602, 606. 6 42-44, 649. See also Liberalism Rearmament, 300, 3 4 5 ,4 2 6 ,4 6 0 , 528 Redfield, Robert, 320, 324, 384, 386, 497, 551 R eflections on the R eform o f the United Nations. 648,651 R egional organization, 315, 3 2 1 -2 3 , 371, 374, 382,422, 468, 472, 474, 549, 576, 655: only postpones the prim ary task, 4 6 9 ,5 5 4

Index to Volum » 2

R egistry o f W orld C itizens, 406-07, 4 1 1 -1 2 ,4 1 4 -1 5 , 4 1 7,502 Regulation o f world commerce, 316 R eligion, 399, 411, 415, 528, 557, 610: only religious belief w ill be able to resist forces o f world domi­ nation, 626. See also Churches Renewing the United N ations System, 533 Reno, Robert, 506 R epresentation, 316, 373, 406, 469, 481, 527, 601: a spirit o f representing the interests o f the w orld as a whole, 505 in peoples' convention, 385 proportional, 321, 3 8 6 ,4 5 9 ,4 6 8 ; w eighted, 317, 322, 352, 358, 362, 459, 468, 492, 531, 54