Non-Weight-pullers
The failure of the three European Defence Community Powers to agree on a uniform term of military service at their conference on Tuesday is serious. .1t bears out, particularly in face of General Ridgway's assertion as recently as Monday that 24 months was the necessary period of military service, the suggestion made in these pages last week that some, at least, of the members of N.A.T.O. are not making for its implementation the sacrifices they may reasonably be called on to make. For it is with N.A.T.O. members that this country, which is not a member of E.D.C., is primarily concerned, and of the States which are members of both France has a service period of 18 months, Italy the same, Holland 20 months and Luxembourg 12. Belgium, like ourselves, has 24 months, but the adoption of that figuie has caused serious discontent, and in the face of the refusal of Belgium's allies to increase their own terms of service she -has immediately decided on temporarily reducing hers. This is a disturbing business, for it means that the troops at the disposal of N.A.T.O. will not merely be less fully trained—it is, according to General Ridgway, the second year that counts—but fewer in numbers. And they would have been almost derisively few even under the Lisbon plan. France's difficulties in particular—American refusal to finance more than a single year's arms programme at a time, having, as France claims, left her no choice but to concentrate on the arms programme at the expense, of the recruitment programme—are well understood, but the consequences are none the less grave. A continuance of the Franco-American talks on this subject is earnestly to be desired. Two years more of concentrated effort should see reasonable security in Europe established.
Previous page
