Search

The article discusses the relationship between Great Britain's national interest and its foreign policy during the mid 1960s. British military relations with other countries, including in regard to nuclear weapons, nuclear deterrence and its military presence in Southeast Asia and the Middle East, are discussed. An overview of the United States' foreign policy towards Europe, including in regard to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and with the French President Charles de Gaulle, is provided.

The author discusses the Defense Review report published by the government of Great Britain in February 1966 and argues that Britain should focus more on preserving the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and maintaining relationships with the U.S. and Europe than on preserving imperial defenses. Topics include British military policy in Asia, the Middle East, and Germany, international peacekeeping initiatives, and the military policies of the U.S. Foreign relations between Malaysia and Singapore are mentioned.

The author discusses British politics and international relations as of April 1964, forecasting long-term global trends and offering policy recommendations. According to the author, the British government that assumes office in 1964 should consider how nuclear deterrence policies may or may not influence European diplomacy and conflict between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. The European Economic Community is mentioned. Topics include international relations between Germany, China, the U.S., Great Britain, the Soviet Union, and France.

The article focuses on public opinion and foreign policy in Great Britain, discussed at the Conference of the British Sociology Association in 1955. The British Parliament has no independent power over foreign policy comparable with the power of the U.S. Senate. Even treaties do not require parliamentary ratification. If parliament wishes to reject a government proposal it can do so by bringing down the government, and with two-party system and party discipline it is only in the exceptional circumstances that the government majority can be shattered to achieve that. This distinguishes the House of Commons from the French Chamber. Whatever else may be uncertain, it is clear that public opinion may become irresistible whenever a policy decision involves issues of war and peace, or the acceptance of substantial loss of British lives. No government could survive British losses in a war whose justice was attacked by the opposition in parliament. There have been instances where British public opinion has stepped in to check or veto a policy being followed by its government. The reason for this is that there are mechanisms at work which, if they are properly operated, keep the public in step with government policies as they develop, and give the government warning if they are separating themselves from popular sentiment.

Three patients had diverticulitis and extraintestinal manifestations of arthritis and pyoderma gangrenosum. In each, a mistaken diagnosis of idiopathic inflammatory bowel disease was first made because of extraintestinal complaints associated with the gastrointestinal symptoms of diverticular disease. The joint and skin manifestations were refractory to various treatments, including oral and intradermal steroids, immunosuppressive agents, and hyperbaric oxygen. Segmental resection of the involved colon promptly and completely resolved all symptoms, without recurrence 26 to 38 months after surgery. Microscopic examination of the resected specimens showed only diverticulitis without any evidence of chronic idiopathic inflammatory bowel disease. Patients with diverticulitis may have extraintestinal manifestations as do patients with other inflammatory diseases of the colon. The failure to recognize this relationship may result in misdiagnosis and prolonged medical therapy, whereas segmental colonic resection may be curative. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]