The amen was clear on the faces of those who spoke for the 12 nations. They were strikingly different in appearance and background. But the President’s words were theirs. They expressed themselves differently, but their expressions reflected his sentiments. They all worried about the lives of their people. These leaders gathered in what British Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin called the “Pool of Peace” to lift the shadow of war that was blocking their people’s pursuit of work and happiness.
But peace is not won with a stroke of the pen. Nothing in life is gained without effort, but peace is achieved day by day. After the exhausting war, in the relief and jubilation, this is usually forgotten, and evil exploits ease and sloth. Another danger is that the younger generations, generation after generation, are apt to imagine that peace is something that will be obtained automatically by the installation of machines.
For example, young Americans today are disillusioned about the failure of the United Nations. This is a false view. The United Nations, like the League of Nations before it, has not failed. What has happened shows that all nations have not yet lived up to the words that were spoken at the San Francisco Conference that created the United Nations.
We should rejoice that so many nations are ready to start afresh, freed from the inaction imposed by others, and reaffirm their obligations. The words of the new pledge seem hopeful because they are words sharpened by bitter experience. The Christian theologian Thomas a Kempis once said, “All men desire peace, but few are ready to pay the price of it.”
Judging by yesterday’s ceremony – not only by the signatories but also by the millions who stood behind them yesterday in silence and grim determination – this is an opportunity for hope. It shows that the idea of the United Nations is very much alive in people’s hearts and in politicians’ minds. It is as if the people have profited from the setback and have firmly established their steps towards the Holy Grail. At the very least, as Luxembourg’s Foreign Minister Joseph Beck put it with realism and moderation: “It may usher in a beneficial era of lasting peace in the world.”
I repeat, all this time saved will be of no use if it is not used to develop this pledge. Unity in resistance must go hand in hand with unity in living together as neighbours. As the Italian Foreign Minister, Count Carlo Sforza, said, this pact, like Magna Carta, must be “a continuing creation.”
Faith and commitment, plus actions, bring progress. One action taken on the eve of the signing of the agreement is noteworthy: France and Italy have just taken the first steps towards a customs union, following in the footsteps of Belgium and the Netherlands, a milestone in the path towards unification that will bind nations together in a common enterprise.
North America has a stake in the development of this solidarity and in contributing to it. Through the Marshall Plan, the stage was set for the joint pursuit of joint ventures. The money was in the bank, so to speak, and pooling of counterpart funds for European projects would be evidence of the proactive peacebuilding that the President spoke of in the North Atlantic Treaty.
