H.Y .TBIOJHB. JAH &6.1,939. rToday and Tomorrow " !,f*raBy WALTER LIPPMANN -= American Foreign Policy in the Making: Senator Nye and Mr, Stimson EVERY one must wish that we had * clear foreign policy. %But there is a reason why we do not have one. It Is that we are trying to fit together the rem- nants of several different foreign policies and to reconcile 3 number of excellent but'contradictory emo- tions. The difficulty can be studied in the matter of the Spanish em- bargo and of the neutrality act as applied to the Slno-Japanese War. • •. , • Here, for example, is Senator Nye who has done more than any other living-American to convince the peo- ple that'If they export munitions to a country that Is at war they will eventually be drawn into that war. 'in the aummer of 1936 a civil war broke out In Spain. But It was a civil war which was In part also an International war. with Russia sup- porting one side. Italy and Germany the other. 'The neutrality law then in force did not apply to a egg war. As soon as Congress assembled In January, ,1937, the' Administration asked for an embargo on munitions to Spain. Senator Nye vot|d for It, The House laid the embargo by a vote Si '411 to l: the Senate, after one day's debate, laid the embargo by a vote of 81 to 0. But last spring Senator Nye In- troduced a resolution to lift the em- bargo in order that the Madrid gov- ernment might get arms. He' an- nounced that as regards Spain "the purpose has not been served." Forced to choose between' his old conviction that the export of mu- nitions would draw us into war and his sympathy with the loyalist gov- ernment, Senator Nye, who has al- ways wanted to lay embargoes; de- cided that ho wanted to lift the Spanish embargo. And then he complains in a broad- cast to the nation that we do not have a consistent and clearly de- lined foreign policy. • • • A much more Impressive example of the' contradictions, that have to be resolved if we are to have a clear policy is to be found in the position of Mr. Henry L. Stimson. He does not, of course, see eye to eye with Senator Nye on the theory of em- bargoes. But at the present time Mr. Stimson is advocating a policy of embargo against Japan in the Pacific and of lifting the embargo in favor of loyalist Spain in the At- lantic. • • • Moreover, unless I am greatly mis- taken, Mr. stimson d:d not object to the Spanish embargo when it was laid two years ago. and probably he favored it. For Mr. Stimson believes in collective action and the embargo was laid In co-operation with Mr. Anthony Eden In England and M Leon Blum in France. X assume that Mr. Stimson was in favor of co-operation. For in October, 1935, at the time of the League's sanctions against Italy In the Ethiopian affair, he wrote In favor of giving the President the 'power to prohibit exports to Italy In -order to co-operate with the League. In October, 1937, he wrote la favor ¦of a collective embargo against -Japan, and he still favors that. •¦ • _. Now the Spanish embargo of Jan- uary, 1937, was, though many have now forgotten-the fact, an attempt on the part of the United States to co-operate with Britain and France In localizing the Spanish War. The reason why. Congress was unanimous for the Spanish] embargo is that the Isolationists like Mr. Nye saw It as a protection against entanglement and the believers In collective secu- rity saw it as a form of practical co- operation with Britain and France. Mr. Stimson says today that the Spanish embargo' was a violation of International law. And of course it was. But in 1936^7 those who be- lieved In "collective security" be- lieved that International law hid been radically amended. And Is not rthat what Mr. Stimson still believes fc-hen he trunks about the Japanese .aggression In China? f I do not cite the difficulties of Mr. Sllmson's position because I know how to clear them up, nut In order to illustrate the inherent difficulties of the problem, wheft a man as high-minded, as learned, and as ex- We* York Trttmn*_Inc Jan. ac AU righu ttm perienced as Mr. Stimson falls Into such contradictions/ it) Is certain that the formulation of American foreign policy is no simple matter. What we are trying to do Is to combine several different theories, each of which makes a strong ap- peal to American interest and American sentiment. We should like to maintain our traditional rights as neutrals In the event of war. We should like also to avoid being drawn into the war by American exporters who exercise the ancient rights of neutrals. We should like also to see aggression resisted: we do not wish to have our economic power used to help an aggressor; we should like It to support those who resist aggression. In short, we. should like to remain at peace, and we