THE CHAIRMAN [Sen. Wiley]. I am particularly interested in something I read recently, to the effect that you stated you were not in favor of the policy ofcontainment. I think you advocated a more dynamic or positive policy.
Can you tell us more specifically what you have in mind? This, of course, is subject always to your own objections, if you thinkthe question goes beyond a matter of qualifications.
MR. DULLES. There are a number of policy matters which I would prefer to discuss with the committee in executive session, but I have noobjection to saying in open session what I have said before: namely, that we shall never have a secure peace or a happy world so long as Soviet communism dominates one-third of all the peoples that thereare, and is in the process of trying at least to extend its rule to many others.
Therefore, we must always have in mind the liberation of these captive peoples. Now, liberation does not mean awar of liberation. Liberation can accompanied by processes short of war. We have, as one example not an ideal example, but it illustrates my point, the defection of Yugoslavia, under Tito from thedomination of Soviet communism.
Well, that rule of Tito is not one which we admire, and it has many aspects of despotism, itself; but at least it illustrates that it is possible to disintegrate thispresent monolithic structure.
The present tie between China and Moscow is an unholy arrangement which is contrary to the traditions, the hopes, the aspirations of the Chinese people. Certainly wecannot tolerate a continuance of that, or a welding of the 450 million people of China into the servile instrument of Soviet aggression.
Therefore, a policy which only aims at containing...