GERMANY’S LOST COLONIES

Press, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22597, 30 December 1938, Page 9

GERMANY’S LOST COLONIES

CONDITIONS FOR RETURN

LORD HAILEY’S VIEWS

PANEL DISCUSSION IN LONDON

CrHOir ors O'XK coksespoxbent.) LONDON. December 1. Two conditions which would justify the return to Germany of her colonies were postulated by Lord Hailey in a panel discussion at the English-Speak-ing Union. One was the certainty that, by returning them, Britain could avoid a war on which her resources at the time would not permit her to enter. The other was the assurance that, fay that means alone, an agreement could be secured by which Britain believed, on solid and substantial grounds, that it would make a radical change in securing peaceful relations in Europe. Lord Hailey made the only formal speech of the evening, and his remarks were broadcast to America. Those who took part in the informal discussion, with Sir Frederick "Whyte in the chair, were Mr Collin Brooks (former editor of the “Sunday Dispatch”!, Mr Duncan Sandys, lIP., Mr F. S. Joelson (editor of “East Africa and Rhodesia"), and Mr C. Roden Buxton (former Labour M.P.). Conforming with the rules of panel discussion, no motion was put to the meeting on “this extremely hot and controversial subject,” as Sir Frederick described it. Lord Hailey recalled that Herr Hitler had stated recently that colonies were not a cause for mobilisation. Mr Chamberlain had said, in an indefinite statement, that transfer was not contemplated. It had not been until 1936, after the occupation of the Rhineland, that colonies had become a part of the official programme ot Germany, and the argument then put forward was that Germany required them on economic grounds for her excess population and for raw materials. As the former German colonies were nearly all tropical, emigration to them could not make the slightest difference, while only 3 per cent, of the essential raw materials of the world came from colonies. There was, in fact, no difficulty of access to raw materials, providing they could be paid for. Germany wanted her colonies back, and had said so, in her own exclusive control. She rejected the idea of a mandate. As Germany had grown in strength and self-confidence the economic and the moral right arguments had receded into the background. The question had left the fields of economics and ethics and entered that of political dynamics. It was important to know how far she -was determined to carry through her purpose. It was stated on the one hand that German mentality was now absorbed in asserting once more the superiority of Germany among the nations of Europe, and that the return of colonies was of paramount importance to her. There was, however, also the view that the colonial demand was only a manoeuvre, that Herr Hitler had never attached importance to colonies, and that his real objective was Eastern Europe. Ideas Of Expansion It would be dangerous to direct our policy on the supposition that the German demand was only a manoeuvre. Alter the events of the last 12 months there could be few people in England who thought that the peace of Europe would be advanced by the return of colonies as a gesture of goodwill. Objections lay in the upheaval which a return of the colonies would make in the lives of the native inhabitants. Whatever else might happen. British training of the native in responsibility for managing his own affairs would, they might be sure, go by the board under German rule. The next danger was that of bringing back to Africa a Power with Imperialistic ideas of expansion, a danger of which General Smuts had consistently warned Great Britain. Third, there was the serious possibility. that the return of the colonies might lead to a break-up of the British Empire. Britain should be clear as to_ the conditions which would justify giving the German colonies back. “There can be only two,” he concluded. “First, the certainty that by returning them we can avoid a war on which our resources at the time will not permit us to enter. Second, the assurance that we can by this means, and this means alone, secure an agreement of which we can believe, on solid and substantial grounds, that it will make a radical change in securing peaceful relations in Europe,” Empire’s Position Mr Collin Brooks held that the possibility of the break up of the British Empire seemed to be the essence of the question, which should be considered primarily from that point of view. The German claim had tremendous ethical justification, and he held that Versailles was susceptible to the condemnation which Germany gave it. When it was signed, it was stated that Germany’s territories would not be taken from her. but they were afterwards taken in the fear that she would again become a vigorous nation and because the Dominions had shed the life blood of their sons to buy them. Versailles was a blot on the scutcheon of Great Britain. He considered that an effort should be made to meet Germany’s claims to create a feeling of goodwilL Mr Sandys said that in the last five years Germany had been turned into an arsenal. He took the view that if Herr Hitler were going to war with Britain, it would not be merely for colonies, but for the richest prize of all, the British Empire. He was disinclined to think that, even were all her colonies handed back. Germany would be satisfied. She had not been satisfied before the war, and there was nothing to show that Herr Hitler would be satisfied now. Treaty Revision Mr Buxton declared that negotiations with Germany regarding colonies had got to come and were going to come, and that Mr Chamberlain knew it. He suggested that the Congo Treaty of 1835 should be revised, and that there should be a reallocation of territories- Germany should be brought in and the Treaty should be enlarged to admit her as one of the Powers administering territory in Central Africa. He did not know whether Germany would accept such a suggestion, hut he was not convinced that she would not. Naturallv. at the present time, she made a ‘demand for the return of all her colonies. If she was denied this, except under some form of control, she would assume that she was to be subject to conditions to which Britain and France were not. A reallocation as suggested could be made after careful inquiry. Mr Buxton said that it was fantastic to suppose that, in the long run Germanv could be kept out of a share of government of the backward peoples of the world.