WORLD AFFAIRS.

Auckland Star, Volume LIX, Issue 306, 27 December 1928, Page 6

WORLD AFFAIRS.

A .WEEKLY REVIEW. %j " I , V bv---- • A . 1 £ ! (By |J ii V*?* r Last week Afghanistan was the dramatic centre of world interest, and though the situation is a little clearer to-day it is still very ominous and disquieting. Though Amanullah is nominally king of this turbulent country, ho has little authority over the predatory hill tribes who make up the larger percentage of his subjects. The Durani, the Yuzufzai, the Abazai, the "wolves of the Zukka Kheyl," and the rest of them, acknowledge only one law—"the law of the knife." They live by plunder, and they yield a temporary and provisional obedience to their chiefs only so long as their leaders keep them employed in pillaging their neighbours, and incidentally cutting their neighbours' throats. The hill tribes, to whom fighting is the only occupation worth following, resentful of Amanullah's Western reforms and his equally odious taxes, swooped down upon Kabul last week and seized a strong position dominating the capital. Apparently they have now been dislodged by Amanullah's forces, but under the circumstances the decision to evacuate the Europeans, especially the women and children who had taken refuge in the Legations, was taken none too soon. Happily the transfer from Kabul to Peshawur, across the Indian frontier, was safely accomplished by air in the short space of an hour and a-half, and the dramatic scene which William Archer conceived, and which millions have seen depicted in the "movie" version of "The Green Goddess," has now been enacted in real life.

Echoes of the Past. But the trouble is by no means over in Afghanistan, and this week's cable messages contain references to places that stir up tragic and ill-omened reminiscences of long-past history. Kabul and Jalalabad, the Khyber Pass and the Kurram —the names carry us back for near a hundred years to the first Afghan war and the greatest disaster that befell the British army in the nineteenth century. After the treacherous murder of Burnes and McNaghten, the British political agents, in 1841, the British troops stationed at Kabul were besieged there for two months. They capitulated on pledges of safe conduct, and they were allowed to leave Kabul with the intention of finding their way back to India through the Khyber Pass. But they never got within measurable distance of safety. Harassed by the hill tribes, exhausted by the severity of the weather and lack of adequate supplies, they were cut to pieces in detail. The force that left Kabul numbered 16,500 all told —4500 British and 12,000 camp followers. Of these only one single survivor reached Jalalabad, where General Sale still kept the flag flying. Lady Butler's famous picture of the solitary horseman tottering toward this last refuge has made this tragedy familiar to all the world. But the pathos of the story as told in the pages of our history is far keener than the artist has conceived it, and the terrible record of the first Afghan war is still potent enough to stir grave apprehensions in high place 3 whenever there is bad news from Kabul.

"General Prosperity." One of the most successful of American cartoonists is fond of depicting "General Prosperity" as a corpulent, copiously decorated, and slightly bibulous military man bending jovially over a well-spread table. Apparently this particular caricature ought to be working hard just now in the United States. Mr. Coolidge, in his last message to Congress, has described the condition of the American people in these glowing terms: "In the domestic field there is tranquillity and contentment, harmonious relations between managements and wage-earners, freedom from industrial strife, and the highest record of years of prosperity." Congratulations to the Americans on the Happy Christmas that they are enjoying! And apparently "General Prosperity," remembering that "good Americans when they die go to Paris," is making a tour of France as well. For a British commercial authority of high standing in the French capital declares that for the past seven years France "has experienced a period of most pronounced industrial and commercial prosperity." Perhaps the most striking proof of this is the fact that about 1,500,000 foreign workers have been imported to assist the French industrialists, and that there are now less than 1000 people in the whole country receiving unemployed relief. And what of Britain, with more than a million unemployed, her coal industry in a state of collapse, and the pleasurable anticipations of last year (according to the President of the Federation of British Industries) largely unrealised? When is "General Prosperity" to complete the "grand tour" by visiting Britain's shores as well? Is it the Tariff? I cannot pretend to explain fully, here and now, the reasons for this strange contrast between the economic condition of Britain and that of her most formidable rivals. But it is a fact that France and Germany and the United States, which, as compared with Britain, are now in a highly prosperous condition, are all Protectionist countries, and their people, rulers and Wage-earners alike, attribute a great deal of their success and their relative affluence to their fiscal system. So satisfied are the Americans with the position that Congress is already considering a revision of the tariff "upward"—in other words, the levying of even higher protective duties to defend American industries more effectually against foreign competition. As to Britain, though the Free Trade tradition is still strong, the workers hava been wondering for a long time past whether they get much benefit out of a system which apparently keeps prices low without providing work at rates of pay high enough to enable them to purchase even cheap goods. The demand for the»extension of the "safeguarding" policy to the iron and steel industries and to the textile industries naturally emanated in the first place from the employers. But this is no explanation of the report recently issued by the Textile Trades Unions, which supports the demand for "safeguarding," and declares that it is unreasonable "to expect British workers to be martyrs to the principle of Free Trade." In time no doubt the Cobdenite fetish will share the fate of all other fetishes in the past; but in the meantime "General Prosperity" lingers and holds aloof. Tourist Traffic. From time to time moralists and social purists of various kinds declaim against the efforts of the Government to attract tourists to New Zealand, and accuse our rulers of vulgarising and commercialising our scenery for sordid gain. I would recommend critics of this type to note the fact that the British Government is "sponsoring a scheme to attract visitors to Britain" by means nf a large association advertising in every country in the world. It is pointed out by the advocates of this policy that while Britain had only 400,000 tourist guests last year, France entertained nearly two million visitors, and relieved them of some* thing like £100,000,000. The Americans boast that their tourists spend at least that sum abroad every year. There seems to be no good reason why Britain should not get her share of it if she advertises her scenic attractions sufficiently, and precisely the same line of argument applies to . ' ■: _ - . v .