The Press THURSDAY, JUNE 2, 1960. Lord Montgomery In Peking

Press, Volume XCIX, Issue 29220, 2 June 1960, Page 14

The Press THURSDAY, JUNE 2, 1960. Lord Montgomery In Peking

Lora Montgomery in retirement has the knack of behaving with an irresponsibility that causes acute embarrassment but not much real damage. His visit to Peking is a case in point. The British Government, which has had to put up with much rudeness from the present rulers of China, is put in an awkward position by Lord Montgomery’s cheerful invitation to Mr Chou En-lai to visit Great Britain as his guest. A man of Mr Chou’s eminence cannot in the modern world ever be a private visitor, welcome or unwelcome. If he went to Britain the Government would have to offer him the courtesies due to his position, or insult him and his country and their well-wishers. In either event many people in Britain and elsewhere would be annoyed. Besides, the Government would have to provide adequate security and insist that Mr Chou co-operate in measures for his safety. Lord Montgomery is quite well aware of all this. He appears to have been overcome by the charm and suavity that impress all who meet Mr Chou in happy circumstances. And no doubt Mr Chou was pleased to entertain Lord Montgomery, both as a great soldier and as a critic of Americans from President Eisenhower downwards. Though Britain’s allies will find the Peking incident irritating, it is hardly likely to upset the closeness of the alliance, as they have become accustomed to the unconventional attitude of Lord Montgomery. Lord Montgomery could do something useful for the alliance in China if he used his

quick brain to get some indication of the trend of Chinese thinking. It is generally, and probably rightly, assumed that the Chinese were at the back of the summit conference failure, that they dislike Mr Khrushchev’s policy of conciliation, and that they need a continual state of cold war to carry through their internal reorganisation. This theory is well supported by such incidents as the Chinese threat to India. It may be, however, that what really irked the Chinese was that Mr Khrushchev had (until the last few days) shown no eagerness to include them among his summit colleagues. One of the most surprising aspects of the summit collapse was that it caught Chinese propaganda off balance. On May 16 the “ People’s Daily ” in Peking was expressing pleasure that . . . due to the efforts of peace-loving people throughout the world and the unremitting efforts of the Soviet Union in particular . . . the four-nation summit conference is finally in session today. . . . Even after

United States aircraft invaded Soviet air space and carried out unscrupulous provocations, the Government of the Soviet Union still affirmed its desire to work for the success of the summit conference.

In spite of Lord Montgomery’s characteristic confidence that he will be able to correct Western impressions of China it is not likely that he will be able *o throw much fresh light on Chinese intentions. However, any information is worth having from so experienced an observer, and no doubt he will have some Interesting things to tell Mr Macmillan.