EUROPEAN UNION

Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 24986, 21 September 1946, Page 7

EUROPEAN UNION

Plan For Future Peace

MR CHURCHILL’S SUGGESTIONS

(N.Z. Press Association—Copyright) (Rec. 7 p.m.) LONDON, Sept. 19. “The first step towards the recreation of the European family must be a partnership between France and Germany,” said Mr Churchill in a speech at Zurich University. “I want to speak to you about the tragedy of Europe. If Europe is united in sharing its common inheritance there is no limit to the happiness and prosperity its people could enjoy. The catastrophe which would follow the use of the atomic bomb by warring nations would not only bring an end to civilisation but might possibjy disintegrate the globe itself. The bomb is still only in the hands of a nation we know would never use it except in the cause of riyht and freedom. “Some of the smaller nations, indeed, made a good recovery from the war, but quivering, tormented, hungry, careworn, and bewildered humans wait at the ruins of their cities and homes scanning the dark horizon for the approach of some new tyranny or terror. There is a babel of voices among the victors, a solemn silence of despair among the vanquished. That is all the Germanic races got from tearing each other to pieces, and spreading havoc far and wide. “If America had not at last realised that the ruin or enslavement of Europe would involve her own' fate arid stretched out her hands in succour and guidance the Dark Ages would be returned with all their cruelty and squalor. “Yet there is a remedy which, if generously and spontaneously adopted by the great majority of the people of many lands, would as if by a miracle transform the whole scene and make Europe as free and happy as Switzerland is to-day. What is that sovereign remedy? It is to create the European fabric and provide it with a structure whereunder people live in peace, safety, and freedom. We must build a kind of United States of Europe. Thus only will hundreds of millions be able to regain the simple ioys and hopes which make life worth living.

Failure of League of Nations “The League of Nations did not fail because of its principles and conceptions. but because those principles were deserted by the States which brought it into being and because the Governments of those States feared to face facts and act,” continued Mr Churchill. “While time remains this disaster must not be repeated. There is'no reason why the regional organisation of Europe should in any way conflict with the world organisation of the United Nations. On the contrary, I believe the larger synthesis will survive if founded on inherent national groupings. There are already natural groupings in the Western Hemisphere. We British have our own Commonwealth' of , Nations. These* do not weaken—on the contrary, they strengthen —world organisation. They are, in fact, its main support. Is there need for further floods of agony? Is history’s only lesson to be that mankind is unteachable? Let there # be justice, mercy, and freedom. “The guilty must be punished. Germany must be deprived of the power to rearm and make another aggressive war, but when all this is done there must be an end to retribution. “I am now going on to say something that will astonish you,” said Mr Churchill, urging a French and German partnership. “Thus only can France recover the moral and cultural leadership of Europe. The structure of the United States of Europe would make the material strength of a single State less important, but I warn you that time may be short. There is now a breathing space. Fighting has stopped, but the dangers have not stopped. The first practical step will be to form a Council of Europe. In all this urgent work France and Germany must jointly take the lead. Great Britain, the British Commonwealth of Nations, mighty America, and, I trust, Russia, must be friends and sponsors for the new Europe.” Mr Churchill said that the structure of the United States of Europe would be such that small nations would count as much as large ones. Germany s ancient States and principalities, freely federated for mutual convenience, might take their individual places in the United States. _ _ If it was the wish of Europeans pi m?ny lands to be free, prosperous, safe, and enjoy the four freedoms and the principle of the Atlantic (Charter, they only had to say so, and means would certainly be found and machinery erected to carry the wish ?to full fr “if°at first all States are unwilling or unable to join the union, a start must be made to assemble and combine those which are wiling and able, Mr Churchill said. Salvatlon T .S f iJnrf common people of every and land must be created by the readiness of all men and women to die rattier than sub Sit to tyranny. The .constant aim must be to fortify the United Nations.

Comment by Newspaper “Is the remedy Mr Churchill proposes for the ills ° ne . l t ,°„ wh jf£. E “!TKe will readily submit? asks The Times” in a leading article. Many see the speech as a proposal, not for a United States of Europe, but for a United States of Western Europe. Mr Churchill said that if Russia.came; into the nrojected Council of Europe all would be well. It might be retorted that if Russia came in all would be Un, nJr e ChSchill based his speech on the assumption that Europe was already and irrevocably divided between the east end and the west end, and suggested that a common menace was the best stimulant for common notion. Mr Bevin. however, has not vet despaired and could not afford to despair of averting a division of Europe -nd the world into two. "British policy cannot work for such a United States as Mr Churchill meant, and British policy makers cannot be assisted in these patient labours by implications which will be read n g the Zurich speech. If the Governments hopes for wider unity prove in ram, then many minds doubtless will t evert to Mr Churchill’s proposal for a lesser but closer unity.” The "Daily Mail” says that it would not be a bad thing if Russia regarded such a united Europe as Mr Churchxil proposed as a move against her ana declined to join in. This would give Europe a chance to renew its ideals and ethics and to find a soul apart from the distracting influences of the semi-Oriental landmass in the East. Reuter’s Paris correspondent sys that French officials reserved their comment, but privately expressed scepticism about the feasibility of Mr Churchill’s plan. Frenchmen generally, were amazed and shocked that Mr Churchill should propose that France should bury the hatchet with Germ The Communist newspaper “Ce Soir” fiercely rebutted Mr Churchills suggestions. , , M Russian controlled radios in Germany have not mentioned the speech and Belgrade has not reported the speech Warsaw summarised the main points- . “Mr Churchill’s speech was not well received in Conference quarters,” says the diplomatic correspondent of the “Manchester Guardian” in a dispatch from Paris. “It is unfortunate that he did not take into account the common misconception abroad that the Opposition leader expresses the Government s views whictb members, for diplomatic reasons, are unwilling to express.” “Britain is expected to talk about Europe’s future but it is not thought that this is Mr Churchill’s job. Mr Bevin himself should have made a statement outlining England’s European general aims, as only the Foreign Secretary can responsibly voice the Government’s ideas.”

New Ship for Canada to N.Z. Trade. -The Waitemata is being fitted out and is expected to enter the Vancouver to New Zealand and Australia passenger and cargo service at the end of Stober. —Vancouver. September 19.