the principle of unanimity <>!' the great Powers. The debate
und struggle centring around the so-called aveto" clearly
indicate that we now i'aee an accentuation of the contradic-
tions1 l>etween two basic political lines, of which one consists
in defence of the principles we have all recognized, of inter-
national cooperation among big and small Powers, and the
other—in the aspiration of certain influential groupings to
free their hands for an unrestrained struggle for world
supremacy. Neutrality in such a question is ambiguous and
unbecoming. The Allies fought imperialist Germany and
imperialist Japan in order lo free the peoples from the fas-
cist claimants to world supremacy. We did not wage this
fight with tbe idea that any other country or countries
should take their place. Our peoples did not sacrifice their
priceless blood in flowing streams in order lo clear the way
for new claimants to world supremacy. That is what we
should recall to mind just now. If the great Powers which
headed the fight against the fascist aggressors keep togeth-
er and, with the support of the remaining peoples, banish
all dissidence from their -ranks, they can do much to coun-
teract the inflammation of insatiable appetites. If they do
not, the new claimants to world supremacy will have their
hands free for adventures of every type, until they break
their necks.
As we know, there are no few methods by which the
stronger Powers can exert pressure on other states. We
know that squadrons of naval vessels and of friendly planes
sometimes appear in seas and regions where they have
not been seen before, when this is considered necessary to
promote the success of diplomatic negotiations. We know,
too, that dollars and pounds do not always stay at home,
especially if there is any need for launching "dollar diplo-
macy," be it only, say, to secure the proper respect for
"dollar democracy." Nowadays, too, as we know, there is
25(5