ALEXANDER GALIN, Soviet writer on international affairs, Professor of History, Moscow
ARTICLES and comments advancing the idea of a reorganized and united Europe began to appear in the press of certain countries during World War II. Some writers conceived the unification of Europe in the shape of a west-European bloc, or west-European federation. Subsequently, Mr. Churchill proposed the establishment of a United States of Europe, and Mr. Léon Blum, desiring to find an innocent-sounding name for this formation, proposed to call it a west-European family. Lastly, on Mr. Churchill's initiative, a United Europe Committee, composed of Conservatives, Liberals and even some Laborites, has very recently been formed in London. In view of the fact that the proponents of a United States of Europe are becoming increasingly insistent -- some of them, indeed, like Lord Vansittart, posing the dilemma degeneration or unity -- we should make an earnest effort to analyze what precisely these "uniters" propose, whose support they expect to secure and what political and economic objectives the initiators of this hue and cry really have in view.
II
The slogan of a United States of Europe is not new. Much has been written about a United Europe and eternal peace in the past two or three centuries. Let us leave aside remoter times and consider only the period between the two world wars.
In 1922 the idea of a Pan-Europe was suggested by an Austrian, Count Coudenhove-Kalergi, who succeeded in winning over the leaders of some of the European countries. But this was a private initiative, and the majority of outstanding European statesmen paid little attention to his congresses and manifestoes. These did strike a responsive chord in some hearts, however, for an underlying note of his writings and speeches was the need of uniting Europe against the Soviet Union...
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
FIVE peace treaties were signed at Paris on February 10, 1947. These treaties -- with Italy, Rumania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Finland -- have aroused no strong opposition, and no noticeable enthusiasm, in the United States. The Senate ratified the Italian treaty by 79 votes to 10 and the others without a recorded vote. They were regarded as a necessary step in putting an end to armistice régimes and the military occupation of former enemy states.
MUCH has happened since I wrote last fall in these pages.[i] Then the European Recovery Program was in its initial exploratory stage. Following the completion of the Paris report of the 16-nation Committee of European Economic Coöperation, and of the Harriman, Krug and Nourse Committee reports here at home, President Truman submitted to Congress a program of European aid from which, after extensive hearings, emerged the Economic Coöperation Act of 1948 (Title I of the Foreign Assistance Act) signed by the President on April 4. Mr.
The Dayton Accord is a bold attempt to create a nation in the face of ethnic hatred and fear, and it just may succeed-but only if U.S. troops stay and the coalition overseeing the peace puts the security of Muslims, Serbs, and Croats before their integration. For now, each group feels safe only with their own kind, and their self-created partition should be allowed to stand while the trauma of war fades. Material need and the desire for profit may bring the three peoples together in time. Meanwhile, the international community must rectify the gross disparity between the reconstruction aid and military supplies flowing to the Muslims and the crumbs and punitive attitude that are the Serbs' lot.

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