EASTERN PACT

Press, Volume LXXI, Issue 21449, 15 April 1935, Page 11

EASTERN PACT

, • _♦ i | GERMANY'S ATTITUDE | DEFINED HITLER GIVES REASONS NO MILITARY OBLIGATIONS ACC EI'TA BLE (s.-ni i r.u fie-4 .i >.t r.:.x-. i kio rr.i.K';i'.al'H luf■ vi:K.in .1 (Received April 14, U. 41 p.m.) BERLIN, April Li. Herr Hitler defined, his policy regarding the Eastern Pact, in a communique. stating: "(1) During the Berlin conversations the Chancellor informed the British delegates that Germany regretted her inability to join the pact in the suggested form, but was ready to approve of a collective security pact consisting of neutral and general non-aggression obligations, arbitration, and consultation in event of a disturbance of the peace. Germany, while emphasising the difficult l ' of establishing the identity of the aggressor, was ready to join general measure.) lor nonsupport of the aggressor. Germany still adheres to that.

"(2) The Chancellor declared that Germany was unable to accept a proposal which more or less made automatic military assistance obligatory, as it menaced rather than nr intamed peace. Germany still adheres to that view.

"(3) The Government, soon after its assumption of power, expressed a wish for non-aggression pacts with its neighbours, making its offer regardless of existing bilateral and multilateral pacts. Germany, not possessing aggressive intentions and feeling itself unaffected by genuine defensive agreements, adheres to that view. Moreover, as Germany cannot join a pact including mflitary obligations, it is impossible that such arrangements, if they lie outside the pact, can prevent her concluding non-aggression pacts on the abovementioned basis. Contradiction Alleged "This is the spirit of Germany's reply to Sir John Simon's question whether Germany is ready to conclude an Eastern Pact on the basis laid down if the other states have already made or contemplated mutual special arrangements. Germany desires to add that obligations of military assistance supplementing non-aggression pacts or pacts ruling out violence are contradictory. If one believes in obligations which are voluntarily assumed, there is no need for such arrangements. If, however, there is doubt regarding the intentions to live up to obligations, such doubts would also be justified regarding the fulfilment ol the supplementary military obligations. If wars can arise from nonaggression pacts, it is equally possible that aggression will arise from defensive and mutual assistance pacts. "Nevertheless, the Government is of opinion that it is much further from non-aggression pacts to a breach of the peace than from defensive military obligations to offensive obligations. Germany does not see in the development of European military alliances either an element of collective peaceful development or a guarantee of peace. Therefore she is unable to sign pacts containing such obligations, whether for all or any signatories."

"MOST PROMISING ADVANCE" VIEW OF POWERS ON NAZI STATEMENT (iENEUAI, .UJkEKMEXT :m:irwn oi.'i'it WIHKI.BSS.I " RUGBY, April 12. When the Stress Conference wa.> resumed to-day, Sir John Simon announced that since the meeting yesterday he had been in communication with 'Berlin and had received an assurance that the German Government was now prepared to be a party to an Eastern European Pact of non-aggression even if some of the other parties might conclude among themselves a separate and supplementary pact of mutual assistance. The only condition laid down by Germany was that the two pacts should be entirely separate instruments and shoulc. not be included in one document.

Press reports state that this step is considered as the most promising advance by the three delegations. It is anticipated that Sigtior Mussolini, who presides over the conference, will to-day give an expose of the Italian views on the European situation. The first day's proceedings are believed to have been propitious and useful. One of the main objects of recent tours undertaken by British Ministers was not to display complaisance about Germany's recent policy but to discover whether a reasonable hope existed of persuading her to resume co-operation with league members in constructing and strengthening the organisation for maintaining the peace of Europe. Cheat Britain regards the league is the organisation through which negotiations 'houlcl be conducted and ell'ect given lo international agreements.

With this object the principle ot collective security is in the forefront of British policy and she :s willing to make her contribution to that principle in every way that is possible and practicable. She will continue to strive for an international armaments agreement and is prepared to accept armaments supervision by a league body. While Great Britain is extremely anxious that Germany should return to the league this object should not be attained on conditions that would do more harm than good by diminishing European confidence, which is the only basis on which peace car. be built up in Europe.

It is understood that the French and Italian delegates were gratified

by the Prime Minister's statement, which showed that the three powers were agreed on the broad principles involved.