The Dominion MONDAY, DECEMBER 11, 1916. FOREIGN POLICY AND THE NEW GOVERNMENT

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 2951, 11 December 1916, Page 4

The Dominion MONDAY, DECEMBER 11, 1916. FOREIGN POLICY AND THE NEW GOVERNMENT

■ One of the greatest tragedies of the war from' the British standpoint has been tho failure of our diplomatists and the Foreign Office in connection with the smaller nations of Europe. Special interest in consequence attaches to Me. Lloyd George's selection of a Foreign Minister and Under-Secretary in the new Government. The foundations of British foreign policy, so successfully laid by King Edward VII, led to the building up of the Triple Entente, which has proved so vital a factor in checking Germany's effort to dominate Europe. King George supplemented his Royal father's diplomatic efforts and assisted to strengthen the structure erected to hold tho Central Powers in check, and Viscount Grey may bo entitled to share in the Credit for this work. But the story of failure which has attended the Asquith Government's efforts in foreign affairs must on the whole damn the Government and the Foreign Office beyond extenuation or excuse. The evidence which has came to light in official documents since tho war started is an amazing indication of the gullibility of our Foreign Office during the Asquith regime, and of its readiness to accept professions of good faith, in spite of acts flatly contradicting such professions. It is true that on several occasions it could be Claimed that Britain had scored diplomatic triumphs, but this was duo rather to the'time being inopportune lor tho Kaiser to show his hand than to any special wisdom or foresight on the part of our Foreign Office; or perhaps it would be more correct to say that, these .diplomatic triumphs were the outcome of the relations'with Franco and IKussia which had developed'as the_ result of tho movement in tho initiation of which King Edward played so important a part. Much has been said and written of the blindness of tho British Government to Germany's preparations for war, and also of its refusal to regard Germany's openly-expressed ambitions as a menace to the British Empire. _ Excuses have been found for this blindness, although the mass of evidence on the other side makes such excuses appear weak and unconvincing. But whatever may be advanced in favour of tho Asquith Government's pre-war policy and attitude, its blindness and inaction on important occasions since the war started have been beyond comprehension. The . restrictions tho Foreign Office imposed on the work of the Navy from tho outset of hostilities—restrictions which !■ for many months made tho blockade of Germany little more than a name —may have served a purpose with neutral nations, but they undoubtedly wero of immense benefit to the enemy. But setting aside the question of interference with the Navy, 'the astounding,muddling disclosed in connection with Balkan- affairs and the way in which we have been duped in turn by Turkey, Bulgaria, and Greeco indicates a dcfAb of ignorance, incapacity, and weakness for which it is impossible to find excuse or explanation in tho facts at present available. The situation in Greece to-day is due in a large measure to the refusal of the British Foreign Office to sec what others could see or to believe what those on tho spot best capable of forming an opinion made known; It may be said that our Allies wore equally blind and weak. But unhappily the responsibility appears to rest mainly on tho shoulders of the British Governments— it was the stumbling block, and if wo are to believo the accounts to. hand it has hung back and hesitated throughout tho whole of the sorry business in tho Balkans. Now, with a new Government under Mr. Lloyd George, thero is to be a new head at the Foreign Office. Much might have come of such a change, but if, as is stated in a message to-day, Mb. Balfour is to be the new Foreign Minister and Lord Eobert Cecil is to continue as Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs, wc need not expect any revolutionary changes. Lord Robert Cecil, judged by tho course of ovents during his term as UnderSecretary and by his various announcements in. the House of Commons relating to affairs in Greece, does not inspire confidence. Mit. Balfour, of course, possesses qualities of statesmanship which entitle him to the highest respect. That he has great ability is unquestioned; ho also has a wealth of experience to_ draw on; he is far-seeing, highminded, sagacious, and eminently a "safe man" in the sense that be may be expected to keep out of mischief. But thero is nothing in his past public life to encourage the belief that he is the man for the office in these strenuous times when tho call is for men bold in action and unafraid of getting out of old grooves and capable of inspiring fear as well as respect. The best thing that can be said for tho now combination

at the Foreign Office is that they are likely to work well together and that thoy will not be hampered by tho indecision of a temporising, "wait and see" Prime Minister.