There's a lot to be said for Mr. Warburg's views on how to co-exist with Russia without playing the Kremlin's game, but the chief charge that will be levied against it is that he is overoptimistic in thinking that -- granted some concessions to the Kremlin demands -- the Kremlin can be counted on to go along with the rest of the peace-seeking world. He feels that certain fundamentals must be met:- we must know our aim; we must face the dual physical and ideological danger; we must have a positive plan for peace; we must know our own ideological power potential; we must be prepared to yield some of our sovereignty. War -- no matter what the outcome -- means an ideological victory for the Kremlin, and must be avoided, even in so far as the appearance of preparation for war. Neither containment nor overthrow can be a primary American aim. We must work toward a world order and outlawing war. He examines the evil consequences of our present negative policy, among which the dominance of Fear is paramount. Some of this stems back to major miscalculations in the postwar period when we successively lost the peace. He then diagrams parallel requirements to co-existence, and examines them point by point:- Germany neutralized and united and guaranteed immunity; Korea united with a free election (even though it would probably not be to our liking); withdrawal from internal interference in China; assurance to India of support- and non-interference; and so on. In the Near East he feels our mistakes have gone too far to turn the clock back, but agreement between England and the United States would help balance the situation. He examines the home front on the personal, the ideological front- claims we too have our Iron Curtain- demands a reassessment of the sacrifices we must make for the cause of peace. Challenging.