The Pittsburgh Press (March 14, 1946)
Simms: Eyes on Stalin
By William Philip Simms
WASHINGTON – Generalissimo Stalin’s violent outburst against Winston Churchill “and his friends,” plus miliary developments in Iran and elsewhere, indicate three things:
First, that the Soviet dictator has been taken into the camp of the young hotheads of the Red Army – leaders whose dreams of expansion far exceed even those of Peter the Great.
Second, that the Soviet Union probably will be charged with aggression against Iran at the coming Security Council meeting in New York whereupon anything can happen including a walkout by Russia and all her satellites.
Third, that a rapprochement of the English-speaking peoples more or less along the lines suggested by Mr. Churchill will receive impetus. If Soviet aggression continues, it is pointed out, the British and Americans will have no option but to act together to save what is left of the United Nations. President Truman has said, most emphatically, that the United States will not let the peace organization die.
Generalissimo Stalin’s blunt tirade against Britain’s former prime minister is widely regarded as the most significant, and at the same time gravest, of Russian post-war developments.
Stalin backing imperialism
Up to now, many had hoped that the Red Army was only feeling its oats and perhaps overdoing things a little. Now Stalin himself seems to be behind Soviet imperialism.
“Keep your eyes on Stalin,” a high-placed European statesman told this writer before VE-Day. “What he does after the war will give you a pretty good idea of which direction Russia will take.”
The Russian masses, like the Red Army, the speaker explained, have never heard anything but their own propaganda. They think Russia has won the war by herself. They think that neither the British nor the Americans contributed anything worthwhile, either against Germany or Japan.
This, he said, means that the Red Army will end the war feeling mighty cocky – especially the younger officers. They are not going to relish quiet life on lonesome farms after their years of victory. They are going to want to carry the Red banner to the far places. Russia wants outlets and bases on the Mediterranean, the Indian Ocean, the Atlantic and the Pacific: Why not take them?
Can’t swim against tide
At present, however, the spokesman went on – and this was some 18 months ago – Stalin opposes vast new adventures. He is getting old and more conservative. Experience tells him that Russia will be tired after the fighting, and will need 20 years or so in which to build up new industries, provide consumer goods and consolidate her gains.
So, he concluded, watch Stalin. The young hotheads may prove too strong for him. After all, even a dictator can’t always swim against the tide.
This week, in Washington, hearings on the British loan are under way. At the same time, within the framework of the combined chiefs of staff, the problem of U.S. peacetime bases in British-held territory is on the agenda.
“The timing of the negotiations,” says Edward Weintal, Newsweek’s diplomatic correspondent, “is not accidental.” On the contrary, he suggests, the topics have an inescapable bearing on one another.
Exclusive peacetime alliances with any country are contrary to American policy. But, it is observed, nations far more incompatible than those of the English-speaking peoples, have been driven into each other’s arms by lesser pressures than Moscow and the Red Army now are bringing to bear on her anxious neighbors.