NEW YORK, Friday—All of us have watched with interest, day by day, every word that is printed on the subject of the Korean situation and the Russian proposal made by Jacob Malik.

In spite of the interest in this proposal and of our desire to see peace restored, I do not think any of us should fool ourselves into thinking that we are achieving a satisfactory peace when we might be achieving only a cease-fire.

We would hope that the Soviet Union, the North Koreans and the Chinese communists, before they made this offer, decided that they would have to make some compromises and that without question there were certain things that the United Nations would feel essential to the making of any peace.

Even, if by some remarkable chance and because of some reasons which we may not at present completely understand, we should succeed in negotiating a satisfactory peace in Korea, however, we would have to look around very carefully at the rest of the world to make sure that a cease-fire in Korea did not mean simply a signal to start hostilities somewhere else. Certainly, the news from Iran cannot give us any great sense of comfort and security, and the whole European situation is always one which we watch with extreme care and anxiety.

In other words, even if we get a cease-fire in Korea and a satisfactory peace, we will not be able to let up in the slightest on our rearmament program. There will be no change of any of the emergency conditions under which we live at the present time, and we will have to be wary and build up our strength both militarily and economically.

Everything we do now, however, if it gives us a little longer peace, can be looked upon as advantageous to the free world. It does give a little more time in which to show that governments exercising their power under a democratic system are able to accomplish more for the future well-being of the underdeveloped nations in the world than are the dictatorships. The peoples of these nations are looking for results. If they come from the free world that will mean that the free world is the better one to tie up with. This will weaken the Communist world.

I was particularly happy a few days ago to see that President Truman and Bernard M. Baruch had chatted amiably together in General Marshall's home. Now I hope both gentlemen will forget their differences.

I am sure Mr. Baruch is ready to do so, since in every crisis his great desire is to serve his country. I hope the President may derive some benefit in the future from the experience and knowledge that Mr. Baruch has in the field of finance. It is a time when this knowledge can be put to good use.

Mr. Baruch has gone abroad and when he returns he probably will bring with him some conclusions in the economic field that we might do well to take into account. We have come to learn that his advice is always sound and helpful.