DEFENCE POLICY

Ashburton Guardian, Volume 55, Issue 129, 13 March 1935, Page 5

DEFENCE POLICY

DEBATE IN THE COMMONS. QUESTION OF REARMAMENT. FOREIGN PROGRAMMES CITED. LABOUR MOTION DEFEATED. (United Press Association—Copyright). LONDON, March 11. The House of Commons, by 424 votes to 79, rejected the Labour motion tagonistic to the White Paper on Defence. The amendment moved by Sir Austen Chamberlain was carried by 412 votes to 78. Continuing his speech, Mr Baldwin referred to the joint communique issued after the Anglo-French conversations in London. Ho said the reference in it to direct and effective cooperation with Germany was, in the opinion of both the French and British Governments, of special importance, and they followed that up by making arrangements for the visit of Sir John Simon to. Berlin. That would take place in about a fortnight. All had their parts to play in these matters—those countries desiring modification of the existing treaties no less than those asked to concur in those modifications. "If the former expect—and no one could complain if they do —some modification of the present situation," said Mr Baldwin, "the latter might also reasonably ask that changes in which they are asked freely to concur be accompanied by assurances which were essentials to ensure tranquillity and security."

Facts and Figures. Answering the suggestion that the British defence proposals would lead to the rearmament of other countries, Mr Baldwin frankly presented facts and figures about the large increases in the forces to other nations, including those of the United States, Japan, and Russia. He mentioned also that many countries anjdi particularly! authoritarian countries, had adopted comprehensive plans for the mobilisation of the whole nation in time of war. They could not ensure immunity against air attack, but they could make it more difficult. That was the idea of the proposed air pact. They had somehow or other to make attack from the air not worth while in any part of Europe. Mr Baldwin maintained that the Government's policy, as set out in the White Paper, so far from being inimical to peace would help them in the times that were coming to make peace more secure. He said they must all wish that their representatives who were going to European capitals during the next two or three weeks might be favoured and prosperous in that work, and that it would bring them nearer to that security for which they had been so long struggling. Foreign Armaments. "Our policy since the Washington and London "treaties has been one of limited replacements, hoping that this would have a steadying influence on foreign programmes, ' said Mr Baldwin, "but tbis has not been achieved. Japan's naval personnel has increased from 72.000 to 88.000. In the last four years they have had a far more modern navy than wo have. America is building up to treaty limits, which we have never done. Her naval estimates are 350,000,000 dollars for 1933, 492,000,000 dollars for this year, and 580,000,000 dollars for next year. Italy has laid down two 35,000 ton capital ships, armed with 15 inch guns, and France is laying down a similar pair in reply. Russia's regular army four years ago was 600,000; now it is 940,000. Russia had 800 aeroplanes in 1926, and now has more than 2000. Japan's army has more tihan doubled in the last four years. Italy's air force has increased' by 25 per cent. The United States army and air estimates have increased by 39,000,000 dollars." Mr L. S. Amery (Conservative), welcomed the White Paper as ending makebelieve.

Sir Stafford Cripps (Labour) said the objects of those who established the League of Nations and arranged every pact and treaty was to get rid of armaments. Now these very pacts were being used as an argument to justify increased armaments.

"Sir John Simon (Foreign Minister) contended that Britain's regular and. territorial armies were now smaller than in 1914. The increased expenditure included £750,000 for the restoration of pay and pension cuts. Another big item was the provision of better barracks, many of which did not reach civilian, standard* "I wish to make a definite statement, with full Government authority, that its policy is unalterably based on membership of the league," said Sir John. iEvery state in Europe save one belonged to the League. His and Mr R. A. Eden's forthcoming journeys were in search of a basis for Germany effectively to rejoin. Forces Smaller Than in 1914. "We are determined to endeavour to secure th'is result, because we are convinced that there is no security in the world comparable with the effective working of a real universal League of Nations," he said. Britain's efforts regarding the Saar and Hungary and Yugoslavia were all under League machinery. The London declaration was approved by all parties in Britain and abroad, and its authors declared that their purposes were unchanged. They were glau that Germany welcomed its fair and friendly spirit. It was in that spirit that he and Mr Eden would visit the foreign capitals. They were striving in a spirit of realism to'find a basis for strengthening European security. They were seeking to do so in equal conference with all the states concerned. The responsibility rested with the Government. There might have been an easier course to take than to face the

facts as one found them, but with a responsibility to discharge not only to the people of Britain, hut to the Empire, lie asked the House overwhelmingly to justify!, the Government's policy. LEAFLETS THROWN IN HOUSE. FOUR YOUNG WOMEN EJECTED. LONDON, March 11. While Admiral of the Fleet Sir Roger Keyes was speaking in the House of Commons, two young women sitting in the front row of the gallery rose and hurled a bundle of green leafllets to the floor of the House. While being ejected they shouted, "Not a. penny for war! Tear up the White Paper!" The disturbance lasted only half a minute. While Sir Herbert Samuel was concluding there was more leaflet throwing from the gallery, and two more young women were ejected. GERMAN PRESS COMMENT. INITIAL MISTAKE REMEDIED. BRITAIN'S CASE MADE GOOD. (Received This Day, 9.15 a.m.) BERLIN, March 12. The "Deutsche Allegeinine Zeitung" says that the British Government realised the mistake it made by onesidedly accusing Germany in its White Paper. Mr Baldwin endeavoured to remedy this. Not the White Paper, but Mr Baldwin's speech, contains the true explanation of Britain's military budget. The net result is crisp and sober, namely, that the British Government has taken back nothing but 'also has made good its own case by pointing to the armaments of nations other than Germany. "The Frankfurter Zeitung" says that the debate has not removed the fact that Britain seems to have embarked! on a policyi which definitely excludes a serious reduction of armaments or any discussions on last year's basis.

GREAT INTEREST IN GERMANY. REFERENCE TO RUSSIA WELCOMED. BERLIN, March 12. ( The debate in the House of Commons was featured in the newspapers. "Volkischer Beo Baehter, commenting at length on Mr Baldwin's speech, notes with satisfaction that the White Paper's references to Germany were intended in a friendly spirit, bulKsays it remains regrettable that so little of this spirit was traceable in the document, and that the opinion that practically the whole world would relapse into Versailles methods and the 1919 way of thinking had to be recorded. Germany welcomed the negotiations on condition that her equaling was neither theoretically nor practically infringed* The editorial specially welcomes Mr Baldwin's reference to Russia, "which, avowedly for the purpose of a Communist world revolution, possesses the strongest war power of the world." The article concludes by saying that Germany's disappointment would not have burst out if the facts cited by Mr Baldwin had headed the White Paper's survey. Herr Paul Scheffer, editor of the "Tageblatt," finds satisfaction ift MiBaldwin's statement that Germany was not the only nation engaged in increasing armaments, but complains that much for which the White Paper is criticised is still left unmentioned.

HITLER WELL-INFORMED. SPEECHES TELEPHONED TO MUNICH. LONDON, March 12. The Berlin correspondent of the "News-Chronicle" says that Herr Hitler was kept specially informed of the progress of the debate in the House of Commons. Portions of the speeches directly bearing on the German situation were telephoned to Munich from London and relayed to the Chancellor's home.

OFFICIAL CIRCLES PLEASED. COMMENT 'IN FRANCE. PARIS, March 12. Mr Baldwin's speech is regarded as a vindication of the French an" British work 'for not at any price." It has favourably impressed official circles, who see in it a parallel to M. Flandin's speech on March 10. Both, it is pointed out, proclaimed the anxiety of the respective countries to organise peace and security while maintaining that the moment had come for an overhaul of defence arrangements. "JAUNTILY DEFIANT MOOD." MR BALDWIN'S SPEECH ATTACKED. LONDON, March 11. The "News-Chronicle," in a leader, says that Mr Baldwin; in a jauntily defiant mood, not only refused to apologise for the White'Paper or the occasion of its publication, but deliberately justified both. His defence at best was a. half truth. He gave no assurance that the Government was not proposing to abandon the idea of collective security.

The "Daily Mail," in a leader, says that Britain cannot be defended by fine phrases, or by leaving protection to other nations, which is the real in-

terpretation of the pompous socialist talk about collective security and the League. A large loan to provide an imposing air fleeet would be perfectly justified. "The Times," in a leader, says that if dictators believe their countries must be self-sufficient in war time, democracies would be feeble defenders of the collective system if they alone believed they could remain inadequately armed. "British democracy will certainly mainly agree with Mr Baldwin's and Sir Austen Chamberlain's statements.