WORLD AFFAIRS.

Auckland Star, Issue 38, 14 February 1929, Page 6

WORLD AFFAIRS.

A WEEKLY REVIEW.

(By BYSTANDER.)

For some time past the Bolsheviks have been circulating reports that the recent disturbances in Afghanistan have been engineered by Britain, and that the agent whose insidious machinations have cost Amanullah his throne is no less a person than "Lawrence of Arabia." Needless to say, these rumours have been officially contradicted with some asperity, and it is something of a surprise to find them now revived at Home. The "Daily Xews" has in effect charged the British Government with employing Lawrence as a spy in the East, and now that he has returned to England, "on leave" from the North-west Frontier, it urges Parliament to "demand the truth about him." But the "Daily News" is generally ready to put the worst possible construction on British foreign diplomacy; also, it is inclined to take the typically English view of conventions, and regard those who deliberately violate or defy them as entirely "beyond the pale." This accounts for its curious denunciation of Lawrence for "masquerading as 'Aircraftsman Shaw'" when, as the "Daily News" puts it, "his real identity is notorious and his activities are a matter of undesirable speculation in almost every countrv in the world." "His Honour Rooted in Dishonour Stood." It is probably too much to ask of the "Daily News" that it should either anticipate or interpret correctly anything that such a man as Lawrence is likely to do or say. Readers of Lawrence's own "Revolt in the Desert" and the books by Lowell Thomas, Graves and others concerning him must have already decided that he is one of the most remarkable men of modern times. But nevertheless he still remains one of the least predictable and least intelligible human beings alive. During the war he did service *>f incalculable value for Britain by organising the revolt of the Arabs against Turkey. But wiien peace came he found that Britain, bound by secret pledges to France, could not or would not fulfil her promises to Feisal. Lawrence regarded himself as forsworn and dishonoured, because he had innocently helped to delude the Arabs. He therefore sought an audience with King George, and told His Majesty that he must return the decorations conferred on him and withdraw from the Royal service because "it was quite possible that he might find himself fighting against the British forces" in an attempt to secure justice for Feisal and his friends. A Man of Mystery. It was partly owing to his disgust at the double-dealing of the Allied diplomats that Lawrence withdrew from the British army. But after Feisal had been to some extent recompensed for the loss of Syria by being crowned King of Iraq, Lit wre nee reconsidered the situation. His principal desire then was to escape from the tempest of notoriety and publicity that threatened to overwhelm him when his wonderful exploits in the East were once noised abroad. A man of simple tastes and primitive emotions, a man reticent and studious, to whom neither social life nor ordinary ambition makes any appeal, he strove to seclude himself wholly from the ordinary round of existence, and with this object he enlisted in the Royal Air Force. To hide his identity altogether he assumed the name of Shaw, by which he is now officially recognised. But the busy bodies of the Press and Parliament then proclaimed that he was in reality a Secret Service agent, and to save trouble the Air Office dismissed him. Fortunately by 1!)2."> the trouble had blown over sufficiently to permit of his restoration to the Royal Air Force. He was sent to India in 11>2(1, and there he has been ever since. Possibly he has been employed on some difficult and dangerous mission, for he knows the Oriental mind as few Europeans have ever known it, and his courage and capacity have been well tried. But now apparently lie is not to be allowed the peaceful obscurity which is his heart's desire. Mr. G. Bernard Shaw has said that the best use the nation could make of Lawrence would be to give him a pension and rooms in Blenheim Palace, and let him spend his time exactly as he pleased. Mr. Graves, in his "Lawrence and the Arabs." suggests that in future Lawrence "should be left alone to maintain that rare personal liberty which so very few people are capable of maintaining." But apparently such a policy is far too unconventional and too "un-English" for the "Daily News" and people made after its type and pattern-, and so "Aircraftsman Shaw" once again provides big black headlines for the London Press. The Hapless Coal Miner. A few days ago, in the House of Commons, a Conservative member caused a great outburst of indignation from' the Labour benches by asking if it is true that "several owners in South Wales are ready to open their mines but cannot procure the 2000 miners required." I am not surprised that Mr. lvirkwood and other champions of the wage-earners were roused to fury. For the question showed gross ignorance of the conditions existing in the mining districts, and at least suggested a callous indifference to the sufferings which have recently secured such wide publicity through the Prince of Wales. As to the demand for work, the unemployed miners must go on looking for it, otherwise, after a certain "standard benefit" has been received, they lose the "dole" and starve. To retain it they must convince the authorities that they are "genuinely seeking employment," which, officially interpreted, means that they apply for work at two pits every day. But, as a recent contributor to the "Nineteenth Century" pathetically puts it, "what is the use of a man tramping to two pits a day, on an empty stomach with broken boots dropping off his feet, to ask for employment at a pithead where in some cases even pumping has ceased"? Destitution, misery, starvation —such is the dreadful ordeal through which scores of thousands of men and women and children in the British coal districts are now passing; and I do not wonder that the Labour members are extremely sensitive about any unsympathetic reference to the terrible lot of the miner. "Those Wicked Newspapers!" The chief American advocate of a "big navy," Mr. F. A. Britten. Chairman of the Naval Committee of the House of Representatives, has just been denouncing the British Press for misrepresenting American public opinion and circulating false reports about American naval policy. Here is a little item on tin.' other side of the account that may have escaped Mr. Britten's notice. For three years after the Washington Conference a report was assiduously circulated throughout the United States that the British Admiralty had broken the spirit of the naval limitation agreement by elevating the big guns on its warships. After three years Mr. Kellogg, as Secretary of State, convinced himself that the charge was unfounded, and published an official contradiction, which was sent in the ordinary course to all the American newspapers. But a contributor to "Harper's Monthly," after a careful search, could discover Mr. Kellogg's correction in only two American journals—the rest were discreetly silent. In the opinion of Mr. Bent, it might be assumed that "editors, after repeating for years a damaging untruth about a foreign Government, would feel a certain moral obligation to print a correction." But Mr. Britten ought to know that this is not the way the thing is done in America, . I