(2 of 3)
Dulles pointed out that such a policy of deterrence inevitably involved great risks. "You have to take chances for peace, just as you must take chances in war. Some say that we were brought to the verge of war. Of course we were brought to the verge of war. The ability to get to the verge without getting into the war is the necessary art. If you cannot master it, you inevitably get into war. If you try to run away from it, if you are scared to go to the brink, you are lost. We've had to look it square in the face—on the question of enlarging the Korean war, on the question of getting into the Indo-China war, on the question of Formosa. We walked to the brink and we looked it in the face. We took strong action. It took a lot more courage for the President than for me. His was the ultimate decision. I did not have to make the decision myself, only to recommend it. The President never flinched for a minute on any of these situations. He came up taut."
After publication of the LIFE article, Dulles affirmed that he stood by his statements "from the standpoint of their substance."
"A Planned Mistake." The hostile criticism passed over Dulles' reiteration of the passive tense ("We were brought to the verge of war") and concentrated on his seemingly active mood ("The ability to get to the verge without getting into war is the necessary art"). Some of the attacks took off from the word "gambled" which appeared nowhere in the article but was used in the promotional headline on LIFE'S cover: "How Dulles Gambled and Won." Democratic Candidate Adlai Stevenson said: "I am shocked that the Secretary of State is willing to play Russian roulette with the life of our nation ... On too many occasions the Republican Administration has acted unilaterally without adequate regard for our allies." Senator Hubert Humphrey made three formal statements in which he accused Dulles of "hocuspocus . . . fraud . . . callousness toward world opinion." The New York Times's James Reston concluded: "Mr. Dulles has added something new to the art of diplomatic blundering. This is the planned mistake. He doesn't stumble into booby traps: he digs them to size, studies them carefully, and then jumps."
From London to New Delhi, diplomats and editorial writers pounced on Dulles. The British Foreign Office in effect challenged Dulles' interpretation of the end of the Indo-China war, denying that Britain had ever told Dulles it would intervene. British newspapers reflected concern that a revival of "tougher" U.S. diplomacy might now be in store. "A dance of death," cried the London Daily Mail. "Heaven protect us from this edgy gambler," said the Daily Mirror, "and his careless way of making his risky throws known to all the world."
Eagerly the Communists jumped into the fray. "The ignoble . . . theoretician of the policy of strength," Moscow Radio called Dulles. Peking Radio hurled a Chinese proverb at him: "A man who has had his face slapped into a bloated shape can only pretend he has gained weight." Headlined the U.S. Daily Worker: DULLES.
AGAINST THE WORLD.