The Press THURSDAY, JANUARY 31, 1963. France’s Veto

Press, Volume CII, Issue 30044, 31 January 1963, Page 10

The Press THURSDAY, JANUARY 31, 1963. France’s Vet o

Britain's current attempt to enter the European Common Market has failed, and the blame rests squarely on French shoulders. Statements in Paris claim that the door to Europe is still open. So-called “authonta“tive” French sources are saying that a “treaty of “ association ” would protect Britain’s trade interests until she was “ready to “enter the Common Mar“ket as a full member”. Such statements suggest that France is feeling some concern about the storm it has raised, as well it might. Six of the seven nations involved in the long negotiations at Brussels want Britain’s membership of the Common Market in both the political and economic senses. Only France stands aloof, and under the terms of the Treaty of Rome, one member can veto the acceptance of a new member. This may be, as some American opinion believes, no more than one round in a fight that will prove long and strenuous. But France has won the round, and everyone concerned—fel-low-Common Market members, allies, associates—will be wondering what the victory portends. Many earnest believers in European unity are now more readily associating France’s exclusion of Britain from the Continent with the recentlyconcluded French-German treaty—a treaty ostensibly of reconciliation but perhaps designed, as many believe, to be the chief instrument of President de Gaulle’s grand political design. If President de Gaulle has his way, political decisions will not be made by the Brussels community—the Brussels organisation will be concerned with technical aspects of the Common Market only. France, with the co-opera-tion of Germany, will make the political decisions for Europe excluding both Britain and the United States. Worse may follow. President de Gaulle has made it clear that his mind runs towards detaching Europe from the Atlantic

alliance. Diligent French spokesmen are reported to have been circulating fresh reports in Europe of an entente of some kind with Russia, to follow fin American withdrawal from Europe. The argument is put forward that a European Continental superpower, operating as a third force, would have a better chance than toe Atlantic alliance of reaching a peaceful settlement with Russia. A great deal depends upon everyone in Europe agreeing to knuckle under to President de Gaulle. Again, American passivity seems to be counted upon. Thus, there can be no certainty (to say the least) that toe French scheme will come off. But the American congressmen who see in the exclusion of Britain from Europe the seed of serious trouble for toe Atlantic alliance are probably right.

It is a relief to turn from the political to the economic effects of the veto on Brit-

ain. The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr Maudling) said recently that if Britain did not get into the Common Market it would not be the end of the world. No-one underestimates the

economic problems that would arise in the long run if Britain were excluded from the Continent. But short-term prospects are reasonably good good enough to give Britain a little latitude in devising and putting alternative policies into effect. Certainly, Britain will not content itself with crying over spilt milk; Britain has a habit of responding vigorously to set-backs. Every friend will be confident that Britain will do so again. In New Zealand there are mixed feelings. There is some relief at a respite from anxiety about the markets for New Zealand primary products. On the other hand, there is sober recognition, as the Prime Minister (Mr Holyoake) says, that our prosperity depends greatly on Britain. We cannot be unmoved by anything that may threaten the prosperity of Britain.