RUSSIA AND THE WEST

Press, Volume LXXXI, Issue 24570, 19 May 1945, Page 7

RUSSIA AND THE WEST

British Press Comment

CONCERN ABOUT DIFFERENCES

(Special Correspondent N.ZP.A.) LONDON, May 17. Relations with Russia have been discussed in the British press with some freedom, following) Mr Molotov’s disclosure of the arrest of 15 Po--lish political leaders. It is clear that there is concern lest Russia and her Allies should drift apart, but the general tone of the comment is that the, differences and difficulties should be faced fairly and squarely in an attempt to reach a permanent and friendly understanding. Asking what lies behind Russia’s attitude of taking “her own arbitrary line” on one issue after another, the “Observer,” in a leading article, says: “A fair inference is that at the heart of Russia’s attitude, explaining both her insistence on a buttress sphere of influence and her single-handed methods of obtaining it, lies a deeprooted suspicion that Germany next time might not act alone. In fact, it Is the old suspicion of a reactionary Western alliance directed against herself. It is still very hard for Russians to believe that capitalist countries will not be impelled to turn against the U.S.S.R. in the long peace-time run. "That is one source of the current troubles. Another is that by the word ‘democracy,’ which appears in so mgpy important passages in the Yalta statement, Britain and Russia mean different things. For Britain, democracy means a system in which the Government is chosen by and is responsible to the people, who are free to oppose by criticism and form as many parties as they choose. For Russian. democracy means a system in which economic security and the right to education are guaranteed by the State; political liberties are considered unimportant.” The "Observer” considers that Britain should say to Russia: (1) that just as Russians have faith in their system, so have we in ours; (2) that if our loyalty to this faith proves to be an obstacle to British-Russian cooperation. it will be a tragedy for Europe and ultimately for Russia herself. “Russia is strong and confident," it adds. "She may feel she can afford to disregard the wishes of her Allies so long as she takes care to protect herself. But a policy of alienated Western Europe and America is the one policy that might in time bring the tragedy of an anti-Soviet combination to pass.” British Policy Blamed The "Economist" says: “It is a policy of conciliation and compromise that has brought the British Government slowly and unwillingly to the tragedy of Poland, in which they now find themselves not only helpless to assist the ally for whom the war was begun, but directly implicated in the handing over to their gaolers of democratic Polish leaders. The policy pursued has done great injury to the moral standing of British policy and to the British claim to stand for the rights of small nations. “These sacrifices were made in the hope of eliciting friendly co-operation from the Soviet, but if anything „of the sort has been secured it is not visible from this distance. To all appearances the sacrifices have been made in vain, the concessions have been made without purpose. If the object of the policy was closer understanding it has failed.” The “Economist” suggests that perhaps the best way to win the Russians’ respect and friendship is to drive as hard bargains as they do themselves. It adds: “There will be great reluctance both in London and Washingtop to come to such a conclusion. Hard bargaining with a friend is not customary among the Englishspeaking peoples, but it would be idle to deny that those who have the responsibility of managing the foreign policies of the Western Allies are being compelled to ask themselves whether they will not have to change their tactics in this direction. And it is the policy of the Russians themselves that is the compelling factor. "For Poland, it is now probably tragically too late to do anything but protest, but other and still larger matters are on the agenda in which the same question of the tactics to be pursued by the Russians will inevitably arise.” / Russian—“ Cordon Sanitolre” Kingsley Martin, editor of the “New Statesman and Nation.” writing from San Francisco, says: “The general conclusion reached on Russia’s attitude is that she still so fears the British and United States plans for Germany and Europe that she has determined herself to make a cordon sanitaire against the West, completely excluding her Allies from any share in all Eastern Europe." Martin adds: “I have talked to those with most opportunity of studying Russia, and they say this is not bad faith on Russia’s part, but simply an entirely different way of thinking and ,a different and often mysterious way of conducting diplomacy. Russia does want to co-operate, but not on territory which she regards as her private beat.” “The New Statesman and Nation,’’ in a leading article, says: “The facts as we see them are that, given the regrettable division of Europe into Russian Communist and Western capitalist spheres of interest, the arrest of 15 Poles is of secondary importance. What is important is that the Russians would in all probability not have troubled to arrest these men if Moscow's suspicions of the West had not recently deepened. "Following the failure of Russia to secure either from London or Washington a promise of post-war credits for reconstruction material, there came the ‘clean-up’ in Rumania. That revealed to the Russians the fact that throughout the Balkans and Eastern Europe anti-Soviet groups, in which Poles figured largely, were in touch with , the British and American ‘special’ services, whose zeal in stimulating and supplying the resistance movements has not been matched by their political wisdom or their loyalty to their Allies. “In Moscow’s suspicious eyes, an anti-Russian ‘conspiracy’ promptly took shape, with’oil, big business, and a whole plague of secret agents as its ingredients. Add the suspicions aroused by the continued wireless contacts between the London Poles and elements hostile to Russia behind the Red Army’s front—is it wholly surprising that the Russian Security Service should have taken drastic and (it may be) in some cases needlessly repres,•sive action? We should regret the forcible imposition of single party governments on all States bordering on the U.S.S.R. But so long .as Moscow mistrusts the West there is danger of Russia taking refuge in this solution."

POLISH PROBLEM

BRITISH-U.S. DIFFERENCE DENIED

(Rec. 9) SAN FRANCISCO, May 17. The United States Secretary of State (Mr Stettinius) has issued a statement that there is no question of any differences between the British and American points of view on the formation of a new Polish coalition Government. The Associated Press says that Mr Stettinius was commenting on published reports that the American position on the Polish dispute, as defined by Mr Roosevelt in letters to Mr Churchill, differed from the British. State Department officials said that so far no reply had been received from Moscow fo the British and American demands for a full explanation of the Soviet arrest of the 15 Polish leaders. Plight Over Pole.—The Royal Air Force Lancaster Aries was flying over the North Pole at 3 o’clock yesterday morning, London time. The machine left Iceland and, flying non-stop, returned just after midday. The flight was made to study navigation in the polar regions and collect information for air routes.