BRITAIN AND THE CRISIS

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22492, 29 August 1938, Page 11

BRITAIN AND THE CRISIS

Sir John Simon On

Policy

HOPES FOR SETTLEMENT

IN CZECHOSLOVAKIA

iBRITISH OFFICIAL WIRELESS.)

(Received August 28, .9 p.m.)

RUGBY, August 27,

A speech delivered by the Chancellor of the Exchequer (Sir John Simon) at a National Government demonstration at Lanark was almost entirely devoted to foreign affairs. At the end of a general exposition of the present Government s foreign policy Sir John Simon turned to the particular case of Czechoslovakia which, he said, was very the public mind at the moment. v

He recalled that Britain’s position had been fully and accurately defined in Mr Chamberlain’s speech in the House of Commons on March 24.

Sir John Simon added: “That declaration holds good to-day. There is nothing to add or to vary in its content.” He emphasised that a solution of the controversy in Czechoslovakia required contributions from all concerned. The Government had recognised that there was a real problem in Czechoslovakia needing urgently to be solved, but it was convinced, given goodwill on all sides, a , solution could be found which would be just to all legitimate interests. Need of Peaceful Solution

“There is no need to stress the im- • portance of finding a peaceful solution,” he said, “for in this modern world there are no limits to the reactions of war. This very case of Czechoslovakia may be so critical for the future of Europe that it would be impossible to assume a limit to the disturbance which a conflict might involve, and everyone in every country who considers the 1 consequences has to bear that in mind.” Sir John Simon said they would all have read the striking speech made the other day by the Lmited States Secretary of State (Mr Cordell Hull) which laid emphasis on the widespread reactions of war and on the necessity for substituting for 1 the use of force in international rei lations the methods of friendly cooperation. What Mr Hull had said, and what Mr Roosevelt had said a i few days later in Canada must have awakened a responsive echo in many British hearts. , „ Referring to Lord Runciman s mission, Sir John Simon said the good wishes of all the world, which I realised how much hung upon Lord I Runciman’s success, were with him 1 in the task he had undertaken With such public spirit—going to Prague not as an arbitrator nor as a judge, but as a mediator and friend. He was there in- no sense as a representative of Britain but as a repre--1 sentative of all men everywhere who desired justice and who loved peace. “I am convinced that all reasonable people in every nation must desire to assist rather than to hamper his endeavours to bring the several elements of the <.< Czechoslovakian problem to a just settlement. Meanwhile it is the duty not only of us, but of all others—and all are concerned in world peace—to do nothing to imperil a satisfactory conclusion.” “A Policy of Peace” Sir John Simon said the interna- ! tional situation gave His Majesty’s Ministers little respite. He defined the general policy ol the Government in foreign affairs as a positive ■ policy of peace. It had been a year of great anxiety and difficulty, and - in nothing had Mr Chamberlains r leadership been more marked than in the resolute and positive efforts , he and Lord Halifax had made to ; reduce the tension and promote an i appeasement. . ~ i For his part Sir John Simon said > he repudiated altogether the atti- > tude which was tempted to say that - war was inevitable. He would rather • proclaim the view that if all - nations alike would do their utmost • to remove the causes that might lead to war and would try to meet in a fair spirit difficulties from whatever quarter they came, war was never , inevitable. There were great coun- ■ tries in Europe with a system of ' government very different from the I British, which no one of them brought up in the traditions of ! parliamentary democracy would accept for themselves. But that was [ no reason why they should conduct their foreign policy as if friendship ■ were impossible with these States of widely different political sys- ; terns; ~ , . Referring to the ideal of peace and the position of the League of Nations, Sir John Simon said, All the efforts of Britain have been directed to strengthening the foundations of peace and the adoption of argument and reason in the settle--ment of international differences. I For we are convinced that true solutions cannot be fomd by use of violent measures. Apart from the loss, suffering and death which accompany such measures, their adoption in any good instance may easily have repercussions which might, in certain circumstances involve others besides the parties at first concerned. Once this process has begun, who can say where it will end? It was the realisation of this thdt led to the adoption of the ideals and principles forming the basis of the League, and it has been a of profound regret to Britain that the absence of a number of important nations has so gravely weakened the League. “If, however, as an instrument it has been found on occasion not capable of bearing the strain imposed upon it, that does not mean that we should abandon its principles- I believe, just as people in this country have a deep and abiding love of peace and a corresponding hatred of war, so have the people in all other nations.. I believe that everywhere the man in the street desires to lead his life in an atmosphere of quietude and security, looking forward to enjoyment for himself and his children of the good things of life, and hating and dreading the awful consequences which modern war brings upon all alike.” A Press Association message states that Sir John Simon, concluding his sneech, said the begin-

ning of a conflict was like the beginning of a fire in a high wind. It was impossible to say how far it would spread, the extent of its destruction, and how many would be called on to extinguish it. “While Britain will fight in discharge of her duties, to protect the interest of the Empire and people, we will always' bring our whole weight and influence to prevent war anywhere in the world.”

“TIMELY WARNING TO GERMANY”

FRENCH COMMENT ON

SPEECH

ENTHUSIASTIC RECEPTION IN

PRAGUE

(Received August 28, 11.30 p.m.)

LONDON, August 28,

A Berlin message states that comment by Government officials on Sir John Simon’s speech .is limited. The opinion is expressed that the speech is vague, although its eagerness for peace is identical with the policy of Herr Hitler, who is aware of the Germans’ anti-war mood and will not precipitate a conflict. Germans refuse to accept the speech as a warning to Germany against war, preferring to regard it rather as a warning to Czechoslovakia.

Government circles in Prague regard the speech as more important than Mr Chamberlain’s, as it reaffirms the British attitude after the Czech mobilisation in May. It is believed' the speech will restrain German pressure, giving the Government and Lord Runciman time to develop a new plan. French Foreign Office officials interpret the speech as a veiled and timely warning to Germany, as it involves support for France if she is obliged to enforce her treaty obligations.

A Rome message says Sir John Simon’s speech is welcomed, as it does not herald a fresh pledge to France, which was expected. Italy nevertheless believes it is a warning to Germany. The United States Secretary of State (Mr Cordell Hull), commenting on Sir John Simon’s speech, said the American record for similarity of thought with the British in the preservation of peace spoke for itself. ’ -■ •