Adlai Stevenson will not attend the Paris NATO conference a week from today.

The decision was his own. It was the result of several listless weeks in Washington, weeks which Stevenson spent preparing memoranda and submitting them to departments actually uninterested in what he had to say. Official Washington's tone was set by Sherman Adams's incredible remark that Adlai Stevenson was brought to the capital not because of his intelligence, but because the people seemed to want it. He was window-dressing.

In Eisenhower's Washington there appears to be a lack of immediacy, a thick-skinned obliviousness to time and urgent demands for leadership. Stevenson was unsure, after a conference with the President, whether he had been invited to Paris or not. Press Secretary Hagerty had to confirm the fact. The President seemed unaware of any partisan pressure on Stevenson, or, for that matter, any real necessity for decision.

Stevenson in Europe for the NATO meeting would have given some prestige to the American delegation; he is remembered there as a wise and temperate man. Stevenson in Europe would have reassured those Americans who have serious doubts about the Eisenhower-Dulles foreign policy. And most important, Stevenson in Europe might have introduced some political and economic dimensions for what promises to be a strictly military conference.

Why didn't he go? The question can best be answered by the man himself. At Paris, Stevenson could not have spoken for himself without appearing to stab the American delegation in the back. He could not have kept silent without implying tacit assent and wordless blessing to policies he did not conceive and did not believe in. At the present time, Stevenson is a political dead man. While more ambitious Democrats pursue more prudent courses, he may speak his mind on American foreign policy. To have gone to Europe would have compromised this new role as a responsible critic.

Next week's agenda has been announced. The NATO conference will concern itself with Sputnik and missile secrets, with numbers of men and methods of military defense. There will be nothing said about France and Algeria, or Britain and Cyprus, or the U.S. and its China policy. There will be a conspiracy of silence against the urgent economic problems which face the free world--the trade barriers, the need for world markets, aid to neutral nations and underdeveloped countries. The politicians will labor next week under the old delusion that wars are won on battlefields alone.

These are the things which Adlai Stevenson can say to the American nation, to those who voted for him and to the many more who are now ready to listen. Indeed, these are the things which he has an obligation to say. His words this time will have an audience.