|
In considering the
state of the Union, the war and the peace that is to follow are
naturally uppermost in the minds of all of us.
This war must be waged--it is being waged--with the greatest and
most persistent intensity. Everything we are and have is at
stake. Everything we are and have will be given. American men,
fighting far from home, have already won victories which the
world will never forget.
We have no question of the ultimate victory. We have no question
of the cost. Our losses will be heavy.
We and our allies will go on fighting together to ultimate total
victory.
We have seen a year marked, on the whole, by substantial
progress toward victory, even though the year ended with a
set-back for our arms, when the Germans launched a ferocious
counterattack into Luxemburg and Belgium with the obvious
objective of cutting our line in the center.
Our men have fought with indescribable and unforgettable
gallantry under most difficult conditions, and our German
enemies have sustained considerable losses while failing to
obtain their objectives.
The high tide of this German effort was reached 2 days after
Christmas. Since then we have reassumed the offensive, rescued
the isolated garrison at Bastogne, and forced a German
withdrawal along the whole line of the salient. The speed with
which we recovered from this savage attack was largely possible
because we have one supreme commander in complete control of all
the Allied armies in France. General Eisenhower has faced this
period of trial with admirable calm and resolution and with
steadily increasing success. He has my complete confidence.
Further desperate attempts may well be made to break our lines,
to slow our progress. We must never make the mistake of assuming
that the Germans are beaten until the last Nazi has surrendered.
And I would express another most serious warning against the
poisonous effects of enemy propaganda.
The wedge that the Germans attempted to drive in western Europe
was less dangerous in actual terms of winning the war than the
wedges which they are continually attempting to drive between
ourselves and our allies.
Every little rumor which is intended to weaken our faith in our
allies is like an actual enemy agent in our midst--seeking to
sabotage our war effort. There are, here and there, evil and
baseless rumors against the Russians--rumors against the
British--rumors against our own American commanders in the
field.
When you examine these rumors closely, you will observe that
every one of them bears the same trade-mark--"Made in Germany."
We must resist this divisive propaganda--we must destroy it--
with the same strength and the same determination that our
fighting men are displaying as they resist and destroy the
panzer divisions.
In Europe, we shall resume the attack and--despite temporary
setbacks here or there--we shall continue the attack
relentlessly until Germany is completely defeated.
It is appropriate at this time to review the basic strategy
which has guided us through 3 years of war, and which will lead,
eventually, to total victory.
The tremendous effort of the first years of this war was
directed toward the concentration of men and supplies in the
various theaters of action at the points where they could hurt
our enemies most.
It was an effort--in the language of the military men--of
deployment of our forces. Many battles--essential battles--were
fought; many victories--vital victories--were won. But these
battles and these victories were fought and won to hold back the
attacking enemy, and to put us in positions from which we and
our allies could deliver the final, decisive blows.
In the beginning our most important military task was to prevent
our enemies--the strongest and most violently aggressive powers
that ever have threatened civilization--from winning decisive
victories. But even while we were conducting defensive, delaying
actions, we were looking forward to the time when we could wrest
the initiative from our enemies and place our superior resources
of men and materials into direct competition with them.
It was plain then that the defeat of either enemy would require
the massing of overwhelming forces--ground, sea, and air--in
positions from which we and our allies could strike directly
against the enemy homelands and destroy the Nazi and Japanese
war machines.
In the case of Japan, we had to await the completion of
extensive preliminary operations--operations designed to
establish secure supply lines through the Japanese outer-zone
defenses. This called for overwhelming sea power and air
power--supported by ground forces strategically employed against
isolated outpost garrisons.
Always--from the very day we were attacked--it was right
militarily as well as morally to reject the arguments of those
shortsighted people who would have had us throw Britain and
Russia to the Nazi wolves and concentrate against the Japanese.
Such people urged that we fight a purely defensive war against
Japan while allowing the domination of all the rest of the world
by nazi-ism and fascism.
In the European theater the necessary bases for the massing of
ground and airpower against Germany were already available in
Great Britain. In the Mediterranean area we could begin ground
operations against major elements of the German Army as rapidly
as we could put troops in the field, first in north Africa and
then in Italy.
Therefore, our decision was made to concentrate the bulk of our
ground and air forces against Germany until her utter defeat.
That decision was based on all these factors; and it was also
based on the realization that, of our two enemies, Germany would
be more able to digest quickly her conquests, the more able
quickly to convert the manpower and resources of her conquered
territory into a war potential.
We had in Europe two active and indomitable allies--Britain and
the Soviet Union--and there were also the heroic resistance
movements in the occupied countries, constantly engaging and
harassing the Germans.
We cannot forget how Britain held the line, alone, in 1940 and
1941; and at the same time, despite ferocious bombardment from
the air, built up a tremendous armaments industry which enabled
her to take the offensive at El Alamein in 1942.
We cannot forget the heroic defense of Moscow and Leningrad and
Stalingrad, or the tremendous Russian offensives of 1943 and
1944 which destroyed formidable German armies.
Nor can we forget how, for more than 7 long years, the Chinese
people have been sustaining the barbarous attacks of the
Japanese and containing large enemy forces on the vast areas of
the Asiatic mainland.
In the future we must never forget the lesson that we have
learned-- that we must have friends who will work with us in
peace as they have fought at our side in war.
As a result of the combined effort of the Allied forces, great
military victories were achieved in 1944: The liberation of
France, Belgium, Greece, and parts of the Netherlands, Norway,
Poland, Yugoslavia, and Czechoslovakia; the surrender of Rumania
and Bulgaria; the invasion of Germany itself and Hungary; the
steady march through the Pacific islands to the Philippines,
Guam and Saipan; and the beginnings of a mighty air offensive
against the Japanese islands.
Now, as this Seventy-ninth Congress meets, we have reached the
most critical phase of the war.
The greatest victory of the last year was, of course, the
successful breach on June 6, 1944, of the German "impregnable"
sea wall of Europe and the victorious sweep of the Allied forces
through France and Belgium and Luxemburg--almost to the Rhine
itself.
The cross-channel invasion of the Allied armies was the greatest
amphibious operation in the history of the world. It
overshadowed all other operations in this or any other war in
its immensity. Its success is a tribute to the fighting courage
of the soldiers who stormed the beaches--to the sailors and
merchant seamen who put the soldiers ashore and kept them
supplied--and to the military and naval leaders who achieved a
real miracle of planning and execution. And it is also a tribute
to the ability of two nations, Britain and America, to plan
together, and work together, and fight together in perfect
cooperation and perfect harmony.
This cross-channel invasion was followed in August by a second
great amphibious operation, landing troops in Southern France.
In this, the same cooperation and the same harmony existed
between the American, French, and other Allied forces based in
north Africa and Italy.
The success of the two invasions is a tribute also to the
ability of many men and women to maintain silence, when a few
careless words would have imperiled the lives of hundreds of
thousands, and would have jeopardized the whole vast
undertakings.
These two great operations were made possible by success in the
Battle of the Atlantic.
Without this success over German submarines, we could not have
built up our invasion forces or air forces in Great Britain, nor
could we have kept a steady stream of supplies flowing to them
after they had landed in France.
The Nazis, however, may succeed in improving their submarines
and their crews. They have recently increased their U-boat
activity. The battle of the Atlantic--like all campaigns in this
war--demands eternal vigilance. But the British, Canadian, and
other Allied Navies, together with our own, are constantly on
the alert.
The tremendous operations in Western Europe have overshadowed in
the public mind the less spectacular but vitally important
Italian front. Its place in the strategic conduct of the war in
Europe has been obscured, and--by some people
unfortunately--underrated.
It is important that any misconception on that score be
corrected--now.
What the Allied forces in Italy are doing is a well-considered
part in our strategy in Europe, now aimed at only one
objective--the total defeat of the Germans. These valiant forces
in Italy are continuing to keep a substantial portion of the
German Army under constant pressure--including some 20
first-line German divisions and the necessary supply and
transport and replacement troops--all of which our enemies need
so badly elsewhere.
Over very difficult terrain and through adverse weather
conditions, our Fifth Army and the British Eighth
Army--reinforced by units from other United Nations, including a
brave and well-equipped unit of the Brazilian Army--have, in the
past year, pushed north through bloody Cassino and the Anzio
beachhead, and through Rome until now they occupy heights
overlooking the valley of the Po.
The greatest tribute which can be paid to the courage and
fighting ability of these splendid soldiers in Italy is to point
out that although their strength is about equal to that of the
Germans they oppose, the Allies have been continuously on the
offensive.
That pressure, that offensive, by our troops in Italy will
continue.
The American people--and every soldier now fighting in the
Apennines--should remember that the Italian front has not lost
any of the importance which it had in the days when it was the
only Allied front in Europe.
In the Pacific during the past year, we have conducted the
fastest-moving offensive in the history of modern warfare. We
have driven the enemy back more than 3,000 miles across the
Central Pacific.
A year ago, our conquest of Tarawa was a little more than a
month old.
A year ago, we were preparing for our invasion of Kwajalein, the
second of our great strides across the Central Pacific to the
Philippines.
A year ago, General MacArthur was still fighting in New Guinea
almost 1,500 miles from his present position in the Philippine
Islands.
We now have firmly established bases in the Mariana Islands,
from which our Superfortresses bomb Tokyo itself--and will
continue to blast Japan in ever-increasing numbers.
Japanese forces in the Philippines have been cut in two. There
is still hard fighting ahead--costly fighting. But the
liberation of the Philippines will mean that Japan has been
largely cut off from her conquests in the East Indies.
The landing of our troops on Leyte was the largest amphibious
operation thus far conducted in the Pacific.
Moreover, these landings drew the Japanese Fleet into the first
great sea battle which Japan has risked in almost 2 years. Not
since the night engagements around Guadalcanal in
November-December 1942, had our Navy been able to come to grips
with major units of the Japanese Fleet. We had brushed against
their fleet in the first battle of the Philippine Sea in June
1944, but not until last October were we able really to engage a
major portion of the Japanese Navy in actual combat. The naval
engagement which raged for 3 days was the heaviest blow ever
struck against Japanese sea power.
As a result of that battle, much of what is left of the Japanese
Fleet has been driven behind the screen of islands that
separates the Yellow Sea, the China Sea, and the Sea of Japan
from the Pacific.
Our Navy looks forward to any opportunity which the lords of the
Japanese Navy will give us to fight them again.
The people of this Nation have a right to be proud of the
courage and fighting ability of the men in the armed forces--on
all fronts. They also have a right to be proud of American
leadership which has guided their sons into battle.
The history of the generalship of this war has been a history of
teamwork and cooperation, of skill and daring. Let me give you
one example out of last year's operations in the Pacific.
Last September Admiral Halsey led American naval task forces
into Philippine waters and north to the East China Sea, and
struck heavy blows at Japanese air and sea power.
At that time it was our plan to approach the Philippines by
further stages, taking islands which we may call A, C, and E.
However, Admiral Halsey reported that a direct attack on Leyte
appeared feasible. When General MacArthur received the reports
from Admiral Halsey's task forces, he also concluded that it
might be possible to attack the Japanese in the Philippines
directly--by passing islands, A, C, and E.
Admiral Nimitz thereupon offered to make available to General
MacArthur several divisions which had been scheduled to take the
intermediate objectives. These discussions, conducted at great
distances, all took place in one day.
General MacArthur immediately informed the Joint Chiefs of Staff
here in Washington that he was prepared to initiate plans for an
attack on Leyte in October. Approval of the change in plan was
given on the same day.
Thus, within the space of 24 hours, a major change of plans was
accomplished which involved Army and Navy forces from two
different theaters of operations--a change which hastened the
liberation of the Philippines and the final day of victory--a
change which saved lives which would have been expended in the
capture of islands which are now neutralized far behind our
lines.
Our over-all strategy has not neglected the important task of
rendering all possible aid to China. Despite almost insuperable
difficulties, we increased this aid during 1944. At present our
aid to China must be accomplished by air transport--there is no
other way. By the end of 1944, the Air Transport Command was
carrying into China a tonnage of supplies three times as great
as that delivered a year ago, and much more, each month, than
the Burma Road ever delivered at its peak.
Despite the loss of important bases in China, the tonnage
delivered by air transport has enabled General Chennault's
Fourteenth Air Force, which includes many Chinese flyers, to
wage an effective and aggressive campaign against the Japanese.
In 1944 aircraft of the Fourteenth Air Force flew more than
35,000 sorties against the Japanese and sank enormous tonnage of
enemy shipping, greatly diminishing the usefulness of the China
Sea lanes.
British, Dominion, and Chinese forces together with our own have
not only held the line in Burma against determined Japanese
attacks but have gained bases of considerable importance to the
supply line into China.
The Burma campaigns have involved incredible hardship, and have
demanded exceptional fortitude and determination. The officers
and men who have served with so much devotion in these far
distant jungles and mountains deserve high honor from their
countrymen.
In all of the far-flung operations of our own armed forces--on
land, and sea and in the air--the final job, the toughest job,
has been performed by the average, easy-going, hard-fighting
young American, who carries the weight of battle on his own
shoulders.
It is to him that we and all future generations of Americans
must pay grateful tribute.
But--it is of small satisfaction to him to know that monuments
will be raised to him in the future. He wants, he needs, and he
is entitled to insist upon, our full and active support--now.
Although unprecedented production figures have made possible our
victories, we shall have to increase our goals even more in
certain items.
Peak deliveries of supplies were made to the War Department in
December 1943. Due in part to cut-backs, we have not produced as
much since then. Deliveries of Army supplies were down by 15
percent by July 1944, before the upward trend was once more
resumed.
Because of increased demands from overseas, the Army Service
Forces in the month of October 1944, had to increase its
estimate of required production by 10 percent. But in November,
1 month later, the requirements for 1945 had to be increased
another 10 percent, sending the production goal well above
anything we have yet attained. Our armed forces in combat have
steadily increased their expenditure of medium and heavy
artillery ammunition. As we continue the decisive phases of this
war, the munitions that we expend will mount day by day.
In October 1944, while some were saying the war in Europe was
over, the Army was shipping more men to Europe than in any
previous month of the war.
One of the most urgent immediate requirements of the armed
forces is more nurses. Last April the Army requirement for
nurses was set at 50,000. Actual strength in nurses was then
40,000. Since that time the Army has tried to raise the
additional 10,000. Active recruiting has been carried on, but
the net gain in 8 months has been only 2,000. There are now
42,000 nurses in the Army.
Recent estimates have increased the total number needed to
60,000. That means that 18,000 more nurses must be obtained for
the Army alone and the Navy now requires 2,000 additional
nurses.
The present shortage of Army nurses is reflected in undue strain
on the existing force. More than a thousand nurses are now
hospitalized, and part of this is due to overwork. The shortage
is also indicated by the fact that 11 Army hospital units have
been sent overseas without their complement of nurses. At Army
hospitals in the United States there is only 1 nurse to 26 beds,
instead of the recommended 1 to 15 beds.
It is tragic that the gallant women who have volunteered for
service as nurses should be so overworked. It is tragic that our
wounded men should ever want for the best possible nursing care.
The inability to get the needed nurses for the Army is not due
to any shortage of nurses; 280,000 registered nurses are now
practicing in this country. It has been estimated by the War
Manpower Commission that 27,000 additional nurses could be made
available to the armed forces without interfering too seriously
with the needs of the civilian population for nurses.
Since volunteering has not produced the number of nurses
required, I urge that the Selective Service Act be amended to
provide for the induction of nurses into the armed forces. The
need is too pressing to await the outcome of further efforts at
recruiting.
The care and treatment given to our wounded and sick soldiers
have been the best known to medical science. Those standards
must be maintained at all costs. We cannot tolerate a lowering
of them by failure to provide adequate nursing for the brave men
who stand desperately in need of it.
In the continuing progress of this war we have constant need for
new types of weapons, for we cannot afford to fight the war of
today or tomorrow with the weapons of yesterday. For example,
the American Army now has developed a new tank with a gun more
powerful than any yet mounted on a fast-moving vehicle. The Army
will need many thousands of these new tanks in 1945.
Almost every month finds some new development in electronics
which must be put into production in order to maintain our
technical superiority--and in order to save lives. We have to
work every day to keep ahead of the enemy in radar. On D-day, in
France, with our superior new equipment, we located and then put
out of operation every warning set which the Germans had along
the French coast.
If we do not keep constantly ahead of our enemies in the
development of new weapons, we pay for our backwardness with the
life's blood of our sons.
The only way to meet these increased needs for new weapons and
more of them is for every American engaged in war work to stay
on his war job--for additional American civilians, men and
women, not engaged in essential work, to go out and get a war
job. Workers who are released because their production is cut
back should get another job where production is being increased.
This is no time to quit or change to less essential jobs.
There is an old and true saying that the Lord hates a quitter.
And this Nation must pay for all those who leave their essential
jobs--or all those who lay down on their essential jobs for
nonessential reasons. And--again--that payment must be made with
the life's blood of our sons.
Many critical production programs with sharply rising needs are
now seriously hampered by manpower shortages. The most important
Army needs are artillery ammunition, cotton duck, bombs, tires,
tanks, heavy trucks, and even B-29's. In each of these vital
programs, present production is behind requirements.
Navy production of bombardment ammunition is hampered by
manpower shortages; so is production for its huge rocket
program. Labor shortages have also delayed its cruiser and
carrier programs, and production of certain types of aircraft.
There is critical need for more repair workers and repair parts;
this lack delays the return of damaged fighting ships to their
places in the fleet, and prevents ships now in the fighting line
from getting needed overhauling.
The pool of young men under 26 classified as I-A is almost
depleted. Increased replacements for the armed forces will take
men now deferred who are at work in war industry. The armed
forces must have an assurance of a steady flow of young men for
replacements. Meeting this paramount need will be difficult, and
will also make it progressively more difficult to attain the
1945 production goals.
Last year, after much consideration, I recommended that the
Congress adopt a national service act as the most efficient and
democratic way of insuring full production for our war
requirements. This recommendation was not adopted.
I now again call upon the Congress to enact this measure for the
total mobilization of all our human resources for the
prosecution of the war. I urge that this be done at the earliest
possible moment.
It is not too late in the war. In fact, bitter experience has
shown that in this kind of mechanized warfare where new weapons
are constantly being created by our enemies and by ourselves,
the closer we come to the end of the war, the more pressing
becomes the need for sustained war production with which to
deliver the final blow to the enemy.
There are three basic arguments for a national service law:
First, it would assure that we have the right numbers of workers
in the right places at the right times.
Second, it would provide supreme proof to all our fighting men
that we are giving them what they are entitled to, which is
nothing less than our total effort.
And, third, it would be the final, unequivocal answer to the
hopes of the Nazis and the Japanese that we may become
half-hearted about this war and that they can get from us a
negotiated peace.
National service legislation would make it possible to put
ourselves in a position to assure certain and speedy action in
meeting our manpower needs.
It would be used only to the extent absolutely required by
military necessities. In fact, experience in Great Britain and
in other nations at war indicates that use of the compulsory
powers of national service is necessary only in rare instances.
This proposed legislation would provide against loss of
retirement and seniority rights and benefits. It would not mean
reduction in wages.
In adopting such legislation, it is not necessary to discard the
voluntary and cooperative processes which have prevailed up to
this time. This cooperation has already produced great results.
The contribution of our workers to the war effort has been
beyond measure. We must build on the foundations that have
already been laid and supplement the measures now in operation,
in order to guarantee the production that may be necessary in
the critical period that lies ahead.
At the present time we are using the inadequate tools at hand to
do the best we can by such expedients as manpower ceilings, and
the use of priority and other powers, to induce men and women to
shift from nonessential to essential war jobs.
I am in receipt of a joint letter from the Secretary of War and
the Secretary of the Navy, dated January 3, 1945, which says:
"With the experience of 3 years of war and after the most
thorough consideration, we are convinced that it is now
necessary to carry out the statement made by the Congress in the
joint resolutions declaring that a state of war existed with
Japan and Germany: That 'to bring the conflict to a successful
conclusion, all of the resources of the country are hereby
pledged by the Congress of the United States.'
"In our considered judgment, which is supported by General
Marshall and Admiral King, this requires total mobilization of
our manpower by the passage of a national war service law. The
armed forces need this legislation to hasten the day of final
victory, and to keep to a minimum the cost in lives.
"National war service, the recognition by law of the duty of
every citizen to do his or her part in winning the war, will
give complete assurance that the need for war equipment will be
filled. In the coming year we must increase the output of many
weapons and supplies on short notice. Otherwise we shall not
keep our production abreast of the swiftly changing needs of
war. At the same time it will be necessary to draw progressively
many men now engaged in war production to serve with the armed
forces, and their places in war production must be filled
promptly. These developments will require the addition of
hundreds of thousands to those already working in war industry.
We do not believe that these needs can be met effectively under
present methods.
"The record made by management and labor in war industry has
been a notable testimony to the resourcefulness and power of
America. The needs are so great, nevertheless, that in many
instances we have been forced to recall soldiers and sailors
from military duty to do work of a civilian character in war
production, because of the urgency of the need for equipment and
because of inability to recruit civilian labor."
Pending action by the Congress on the broader aspects of
national service, I recommend that the Congress immediately
enact legislation which will be effective in using the services
of the 4,000,000 men now classified as IV-F in whatever capacity
is best for the war effort.
In the field of foreign policy, we propose to stand together
with the United Nations not for the war alone but for the
victory for which the war is fought.
It is not only a common danger which unites us but a common
hope. Ours is an association not of governments but of
peoples--and the peoples' hope is peace. Here, as in England; in
England, as in Russia; in Russia, as in China; in France, and
through the continent of Europe, and throughout the world;
wherever men love freedom, the hope and purpose of the people
are for peace--a peace that is durable and secure.
It will not be easy to create this peoples' peace. We delude
ourselves if we believe that the surrender of the armies of our
enemies will make the peace we long for. The unconditional
surrender of the armies of our enemies is the first and
necessary step--but the first step only.
We have seen already, in areas liberated from the Nazi and the
Fascist tyranny, what problems peace will bring. And we delude
ourselves if we attempt to believe wishfully that all these
problems can be solved overnight.
The firm foundation can be built--and it will be built. But the
continuance and assurance of a living peace must, in the long
run, be the work of the people themselves.
We ourselves, like all peoples who have gone through the
difficult processes of liberation and adjustment, know of our
own experience how great the difficulties can be. We know that
they are not difficulties peculiar to any continent or any
nation. Our own Revolutionary War left behind it, in the words
of one American historian, "an eddy of lawlessness and disregard
of human life." There were separatist movements of one kind or
another in Vermont, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Tennessee, Kentucky,
and Maine. There were insurrections, open or threatened, in
Massachusetts and New Hampshire. These difficulties we worked
out for ourselves as the peoples of the liberated areas of
Europe, faced with complex problems of adjustment, will work out
their difficulties for themselves.
Peace can be made and kept only by the united determination of
free and peace-loving peoples who are willing to work
together--willing to help one another--willing to respect and
tolerate and try to understand one another's opinions and
feelings.
The nearer we come to vanquishing our enemies the more we
inevitably become conscious of differences among the victors.
We must not let those differences divide us and blind us to our
more important common and continuing interests in winning the
war and building the peace.
International cooperation on which enduring peace must be based
is not a one-way street.
Nations like individuals do not always see alike or think alike,
and international cooperation and progress are not helped by any
nation assuming that it has a monopoly of wisdom or of virtue.
In the future world the misuse of power, as implied in the term
"power politics," must not be a controlling factor in
international relations. That is the heart of the principles to
which we have subscribed. We cannot deny that power is a factor
in world politics any more than we can deny its existence as a
factor in national politics. But in a democratic world, as in a
democratic nation, power must be linked with responsibility, and
obliged to defend and justify itself within the framework of the
general good.
Perfectionism, no less than isolationism or imperialir politics,
may obstruct the paths to international peace. Let us not forget
that the retreat to isolationism a quarter of a century ago was
started not by a direct attack against international cooperation
but against the alleged imperfections of the peace.
In our disillusionment after the last war we preferred
international anarchy to international cooperation with nations
which did not see and think exactly as we did. We gave up the
hope of gradually achieving a better peace because we had not
the courage to fulfill our responsibilities in an admittedly
imperfect world.
We must not let that happen again, or we shall follow the same
tragic road again--the road to a third world war.
We can fulfill our responsibilities for maintaining the security
of our own country only by exercising our power and our
influence to achieve the principles in which we believe and for
which we have fought.
In August 1941 Prime Minister Churchill and I agreed to the
principles of the Atlantic Charter, these being later
incorporated into the Declaration by United Nations of January
1, 1942. At that time certain isolationists protested vigorously
against our right to proclaim the principles--and against the
very principles themselves. Today, many of the same people are
protesting against the possibility of violation of the same
principles.
It is true that the statement of principles in the Atlantic
Charter does not provide rules of easy application to each and
every one of this war-torn world's tangled situations. But it is
a good and a useful thing--it is an essential thing--to have
principles toward which we can aim.
And we shall not hesitate to use our influence--and to use it
now-- to secure so far as is humanly possible the fulfillment of
the principles of the Atlantic Charter. We have not shrunk from
the military responsibilities brought on by this war. We cannot
and will not shrink from the political responsibilities which
follow in the wake of battle.
I do not wish to give the impression that all mistakes can be
avoided and that many disappointments are not inevitable in the
making of peace. But we must not this time lose the hope of
establishing an international order which will be capable of
maintaining peace and realizing through the years more perfect
justice between nations.
To do this we must be on our guard not to exploit and exaggerate
the differences between us and our allies, particularly with
reference to the peoples who have been liberated from Fascist
tyranny. That is not the way to secure a better settlement of
those differences or to secure international machinery which can
rectify mistakes which may be made.
I should not be frank if I did not admit concern about many
situations--the Greek and Polish for example. But those
situations are not as easy or as simple to deal with as some
spokesmen, whose sincerity I do not question, would have us
believe. We have obligations, not necessarily legal, to the
exiled governments, to the underground leaders, and to our major
allies who came much nearer the shadows than we did.
We and our allies have declared that it is our purpose to
respect the right of all peoples to choose the form of
government under which they will live and to see sovereign
rights and self-government restored to those who have been
forcibly deprived of them. But with internal dissension, with
many citizens of liberated countries still prisoners of war or
forced to labor in Germany, it is difficult to guess the kind of
self-government the people really want.
During the interim period, until conditions permit a genuine
expression of the people's will, we and our allies have a duty,
which we cannot ignore, to use our influence to the end that no
temporary or provisional authorities in the liberated countries
block the eventual exercise of the peoples' right freely to
choose the government and institutions under which, as freemen,
they are to live.
It is only too easy for all of us to rationalize what we want to
believe, and to consider those leaders we like responsible and
those we dislike irresponsible. And our task is not helped by
stubborn partisanship, however understandable on the part of
opposed internal factions.
It is our purpose to help the peace-loving peoples of Europe to
live together as good neighbors, to recognize their common
interests and not to nurse their traditional grievances against
one another.
But we must not permit the many specific and immediate problems
of adjustment connected with the liberation of Europe to delay
the establishment of permanent machinery for the maintenance of
peace. Under the threat of a common danger, the United Nations
joined together in war to preserve their independence and their
freedom. They must now join together to make secure the
independence and freedom of all peace-loving states, so that
never again shall tyranny be able to divide and conquer.
International peace and well-being, like national peace and
well-being, require constant alertness, continuing cooperation,
and organized effort.
International peace and well-being, like national peace and
well-being, can be secured only through institutions capable of
life and growth.
Many of the problems of the peace are upon us even now while the
conclusion of the war is still before us. The atmosphere of
friendship and mutual understanding and determination to find a
common ground of common understanding, which surrounded the
conversations at Dumbarton Oaks, gives us reason to hope that
future discussions will succeed in developing the democratic and
fully integrated world security system toward which these
preparatory conversations were directed.
We and the other United Nations are going forward, with vigor
and resolution, in our efforts to create such a system by
providing for it strong and flexible institutions of joint and
cooperative action.
The aroused conscience of humanity will not permit failure in
this supreme endeavor.
We believe that the extraordinary advances in the means of
intercommunication between peoples over the past generation
offer a practical method of advancing the mutual understanding
upon which peace and the institutions of peace must rest, and it
is our policy and purpose to use these great technological
achievements for the common advantage of the world.
We support the greatest possible freedom of trade and commerce.
We Americans have always believed in freedom of opportunity, and
equality of opportunity remains one of the principal objectives
of our national life. What we believe in for individuals, we
believe in also for nations. We are opposed to restrictions,
whether by public act or private arrangement, which distort and
impair commerce, transit and trade.
We have house cleaning of our own to do in this regard. But it
is our hope, not only in the interest of our own prosperity but
in the interest of the prosperity of the world, that trade and
commerce and access to materials and markets may be freer after
this war than ever before in the history of the world.
One of the most heartening events of the year in the
international field has been the renaissance of the French
people and the return of the French nation to the ranks of the
United Nations. Far from having been crushed by the terror of
Nazi domination, the French people have emerged with stronger
faith than ever in the destiny of their country and in the
soundness of the democratic ideals to which the French nation
has traditionally contributed so greatly.
During her liberation, France has given proof of her unceasing
determination to fight the Germans, continuing the heroic
efforts of the resistance groups under the occupation and of all
those Frenchmen throughout the world who refused to surrender
after the disaster of 1940.
Today, French armies are again on the German frontier, and are
again fighting shoulder to shoulder with our sons.
Since our landings in Africa, we have placed in French hands all
the arms and material of war which our resources and the
military situation permitted. And I am glad to say that we are
now about to equip large new French forces with the most modern
weapons for combat duty.
In addition to the contribution which France can make to our
common victory, her liberation likewise means that her great
influence will again be available in meeting the problems of
peace.
We fully recognize France's vital interest in a lasting solution
of the German problem and the contribution which she can make in
achieving international security. Her formal adherence to the
declaration by United Nations a few days ago and the proposal at
the Dumbarton Oaks discussions, whereby France would receive one
of the five permanent seats in the proposed Security Council,
demonstrate the extent to which France has resumed her proper
position of strength and leadership.
I am clear in my own mind that, as an essential factor in the
maintenance of peace in the future, we must have universal
military training after this war, and I shall send a special
message to the Congress on this subject.
An enduring peace cannot be achieved without a strong America--
strong in the social and economic sense as well as in the
military sense.
In the state of the Union message last year I set forth what I
considered to be an American economic bill of rights.
I said then, and I say now, that these economic truths represent
a second bill of rights under which a new basis of security and
prosperity can be established for all--regardless of station,
race or creed.
Of these rights the most fundamental, and one on which the
fulfillment of the others in large degree depends, is the "right
to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or
farms or mines of the Nation." In turn, others of the economic
rights of American citizenship, such as the right to a decent
home, to a good education, to good medical care, to social
security, to reasonable farm income, will, if fulfilled, make
major contributions to achieving adequate levels of employment.
The Federal Government must see to it that these rights become
realities--with the help of States, municipalities, business,
labor, and agriculture.
We have had full employment during the war. We have had it
because the Government has been ready to buy all the materials
of war which the country could produce--and this has amounted to
approximately half our present productive capacity.
After the war we must maintain full employment with Government
performing its peacetime functions. This means that we must
achieve a level of demand and purchasing power by private
consumers-- farmers, businessmen, workers, professional men,
housewives--which is sufficiently high to replace wartime
Government demands; and it means also that we must greatly
increase our export trade above the pre-war level.
Our policy is, of course, to rely as much as possible on private
enterprise to provide jobs. But the American people will not
accept mass unemployment or mere makeshift work. There will be
need for the work of everyone willing and able to work--and that
means close to 60,000,000 jobs.
Full employment means not only jobs--but productive jobs.
Americans do not regard jobs that pay substandard wages as
productive jobs.
We must make sure that private enterprise works as it is
supposed to work--on the basis of initiative and vigorous
competition, without the stifling presence of monopolies and
cartels.
During the war we have guaranteed investment in enterprise
essential to the war effort. We should also take appropriate
measures in peacetime to secure opportunities for new small
enterprises and for productive business expansion for which
finance would otherwise be unavailable.
This necessary expansion of our peacetime productive capacity
will require new facilities, new plants, and new equipment.
It will require large outlays of money which should be raised
through normal investment channels. But while private capital
should finance this expansion program, the Government should
recognize its responsibility for sharing part of any special or
abnormal risk of loss attached to such financing.
Our full-employment program requires the extensive development
of our natural resources and other useful public works. The
undeveloped resources of this continent are still vast. Our
river-watershed projects will add new and fertile territories to
the United States. The Tennessee Valley Authority, which was
constructed at a cost of $750,000,000--the cost of waging this
war for less than 4 days--was a bargain. We have similar
opportunities in our other great river basins. By harnessing the
resources of these river basins, as we have in the Tennessee
Valley, we shall provide the same kind of stimulus to enterprise
as was provided by the Louisiana Purchase and the new
discoveries in the West during the nineteenth century.
If we are to avail ourselves fully of the benefits of civil
aviation, and if we are to use the automobiles we can produce,
it will be necessary to construct thousands of airports and to
overhaul our entire national highway system.
The provision of a decent home for every family is a national
necessity, if this country is to be worthy of its greatness--and
that task will itself create great employment opportunities.
Most of our cities need extensive rebuilding. Much of our farm
plant is in a state of disrepair. To make a frontal attack on
the problems of housing and urban reconstruction will require
thoroughgoing cooperation between industry and labor, and the
Federal, State, and local governments.
An expanded social-security program, and adequate health and
education programs, must play essential roles in a program
designed to support individual productivity and mass purchasing
power. I shall communicate further with the Congress on these
subjects at a later date.
The millions of productive jobs that a program of this nature
could bring are jobs in private enterprise. They are jobs based
on the expanded demand for the output of our economy for
consumption and investment. Through a program of this character
we can maintain a national income high enough to provide for an
orderly retirement of the public debt along with reasonable tax
reduction.
Our present tax system geared primarily to war requirements must
be revised for peacetime so as to encourage private demand.
While no general revision of the tax structure can be made until
the war ends on all fronts, the Congress should be prepared to
provide tax modifications at the end of the war in Europe,
designed to encourage capital to invest in new enterprises and
to provide jobs. As an integral part of this program to maintain
high employment, we must, after the war is over, reduce or
eliminate taxes which bear too heavily on consumption.
The war will leave deep disturbances in the world economy, in
our national economy, in many communities, in many families, and
in many individuals. It will require determined effort and
responsible action of all of us to find our way back to
peacetime, and to help others to find their way back to
peacetime--a peacetime that holds the values of the past and the
promise of the future.
If we attack our problems with determination we shall succeed.
And we must succeed. For freedom and peace cannot exist without
security.
During the past year the American people, in a national
election, reasserted their democratic faith.
In the course of that campaign various references were made to
"strife" between this administration and the Congress, with the
implication, if not the direct assertion, that this
administration and the Congress could never work together
harmoniously in the service of the Nation.
It cannot be denied that there have been disagreements between
the legislative and executive branches--as there have been
disagreements during the past century and a half.
I think we all realize too that there are some people in this
Capital City whose task is in large part to stir up dissension,
and to magnify normal healthy disagreements so that they appear
to be irreconcilable conflicts.
But--I think that the over-all record in this respect is
eloquent: The Government of the United States of America--all
branches of it--has a good record of achievement in this war.
The Congress, the Executive, and the Judiciary have worked
together for the common good.
I myself want to tell you, the Members of the Senate and of the
House of Representatives, how happy I am in our relationships
and friendships. I have not yet had the pleasure of meeting some
of the new Members in each House, but I hope that opportunity
will offer itself in the near future.
We have a great many problems ahead of us and we must approach
them with realism and courage.
This new year of 1945 can be the greatest year of achievement in
human history.
Nineteen forty-five can see the final ending of the Nazi-Fascist
reign of terror in Europe.
Nineteen forty-five can see the closing in of the forces of
retribution about the center of the malignant power of
imperialistic Japan.
Most important of all--1945 can and must see the substantial
beginning of the organization of world peace. This organization
must be the fulfillment of the promise for which men have fought
and died in this war. It must be the justification of all the
sacrifices that have been made--of all the dreadful misery that
this world has endured.
We Americans of today, together with our allies, are making
history--and I hope it will be better history than ever has been
made before.
We pray that we may be worthy of the unlimited opportunities
that God has given us.
Franklin Roosevelt |
