The Press THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 1942 Mr Churchill Reports

Press, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 23739, 10 September 1942, Page 4

The Press THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 1942 Mr Churchill Reports

At Churchill’s latest war review is nainly a statement of the reasons or, and the results of, his recent dsits to Cairo and Moscow; this nay explain why, for the first time ince the beginning of the war, he lid not succeed in holding his audimce. What happens in the next ew weeks must so greatly affect he course of the war that the louse of Commons, like the geniral public, is much more interested n events than in expositions and .rguments. Nevertheless, the House lid less than justice to an excepionally interesting speech. Mr Ihurchill’s reasons for visiting lairo were obvious. The Bth had lost 80,000 men and had teen driven back 400 miles since Jay; all ranks had “a sense of ' being baffled and not understand--1 ing why so many misfortunes had 'fallen upon them.” Mr Churchill ook on himself the responsibility if reorganising the command; and t is already possible to say, from he results of the recent engagenent, that the ,Bth Army is now treatly improved in morale as well is in equipment. No more than his can be said at the present time, rhe real test of the reorganised command is still to come; and Mr Churchill’s prestige as a war leader s bound up with the result. The ■easons for Mr Churchill’s visit to Moscow were less apparent. As ar as the public knew from official iources, Russia and the democracies vere in full accord on strategy (as vitness the second front formula of he previous June) and were disposing their plans to one another ‘fully and frankly.” It was theresore disquieting to hear from Mr Churchill that he had gone to Mos:ow to speak his mind and even nore disquieting to find the discussions between Mr' Churchill and M. Stalin officially described as “ negotiations.” Mr Churchill’s latest statement on the subject will do lothing to allay an uneasiness over relations between Russia and the democracies which has been grow,ng ever since his Moscow visit, rhe Russians, he says bluntly, “do ‘not think that either we or the ‘Americans have done enough so ‘far to take the weight off them”; md it was “difficult to make the ‘ Russians comprehend ” the obstacles in the way of aiding them nore effectually. Moreover, there s a curious hint as to the lature of Russia’s relations with :he democracies in Mr - Churchill’s statement that he went to Moscow ‘ armed ” with a complete agreenent between the British and United States Governments on war policy and war plans—an agreement concluded after M. Molotov’s usit to London and Washington. Since Mr Churchill does not use words loosely, it must be assumed shat this agreement was a weapon n a diplomatic battle. It is clear :rom what he .says and from what le does hOt say that his visit to Moscow has not smoothed away all she obstacles to full understanding md collaboration among the Allies. But he can at least be thanked for lis frankness, for his refusal to sake refuge in the vapid phrases with which propaganda and diplomacy have sought to conceal the realities of Russia’s position as an illy. It would, after all, be strange if a country so remote from she democracies in her political and mltural traditions and in her methods of 'government should igree with them quickly and easily m fundamental issues of peace and war, The natural and inevitable lifferences between the viewpoint )f Moscow and the viewpoint of London and Washington will become dangerous only if there is a :onspiracy to pretend that they do lot exist.