HERBERT FEIS, former Adviser on International Economic Affairs in the Department of State; recently Special Adviser to the Secretary of War; author of "The Changing Pattern of International Economic Affairs" and "The Sinews of Peace"
WHEN a dispute erupts in the realms of action and of doctrine at the same time it is ominous. An eruption of this type is occurring now over commercial policy. The lava of argument is pouring over the surfaces where national wills clash and shooting into the skies where doctrines spend their angry eternity. I will begin with the dispute over doctrine as the better way of defining the issues uncomplicated by particular local circumstances.
I
The American Government is sponsoring at an international conference now meeting in London a suggested Charter for an International Trade Organization. This proposal is the outcome of sustained searching by American and foreign experts for an agreed statement of principles to govern the trade policy of nations. Its terms express a stubborn will to draw countries into a joint program for the reduction of trade restrictions; and they reflect a dogged judgment that the most satisfactory basis for trade is world-wide and unmanaged competition.
It is impossible to condense the detailed prescriptions of the many articles of this Charter satisfactorily. But the basic economic conceptions which shaped them all are easily identified. They are: (1) that governments should reduce all types of restriction imposed on imports and exports; (2) that each should abstain from actions which would cause products produced within their territories to be offered in foreign markets at prices out of correspondence with domestic prices; (3) that each should permit products from every foreign land to compete within its markets on equal terms, and thereby leave the origin of imports to be settled by universal competition; (4) that each should accord all foreign buyers equal opportunity to secure its products on the same terms; (5) that each should abstain from bilateral agreements for the exchange of goods that would or might lessen the opportunity of others to compete for the trade. This is a broad but, I believe, correct interpretation of the conceptions embodied in the many articles of the Charter...
This is a premium article
You must be a logged in Foreign Affairs subscriber to continue reading. If you wish to continue reading this article please subscribe , or activate your online account to get full online access.
Log In
Buy PDF
Buy a premium PDF reprint of this article.Related
THE war confronts the whole horizon of spirit and of mind. Our own participation in it advances step by step. We do not know the cost or duration of the struggle, only that it must be won. Still the impulse survives, amidst the deepening fury, to seek the terms on which a peaceful world, more satisfactory and more stable than the one we have known, may be established. Students and public officials, responding sympathetically and almost instinctively to the feeling of the nation, join in this search.
THE eight-point statement signed at sea by President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill formalized, among other things, the conviction that if this war is to lead to a sounder relationship between the nations of the earth, then international trade must be so regulated as to minimize destructive economic rivalries. Their statement also suggested that it is not too early to begin planning now for the peace to come. And, in fact, both governments are beginning to plan.
IT MAY be that the multi-colored globes that stand in schoolrooms are still found. Out of established habit statesmen may still make declarations in terms of the whole collection or community of nations. It is possible that the inter-governmental machinery at Geneva, called the League of Nations, can repair its broken lines and dramatically bring back into the circle of consultation the important countries now missing. But for the passing day, at least, in all the realms of actuality which make up contemporary history, the world is becoming increasingly divided.

Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.