The Dominion MONDAY, APRIL 9, 1923. AMERICA AND EUROPE

Dominion, Volume 16, Issue 172, 9 April 1923, Page 6

The Dominion MONDAY, APRIL 9, 1923. AMERICA AND EUROPE

Mr. Lloyd George’s article on the League of Nations is in eyestingly supplemented by a cablegram from New York which appear to-day. This reports that the anniversary of America s entry into the European war was signalised by meetings held in vir ua y' State for the purpose of urging “American participation in the Geneva body.” . Some details in the message are suggestive of a promising awakening of American public opinion to the advantages of League membership. It might be optimistic, however, to accept unreserve y the assertion that the question of American membership in some form of international association will be the paramount issue at the nex Presidential campaign in 1924.. . Hope of American co-operation in international affairs on some such basis as the League provides appears, indeed, to rest largely on the fact that League membership is unlikely to become again such a bone of contention in American party politics as it became in 1920. The experience of the last four years suggests that it will never be easy for American statesmen to engineer a boldly comprehensive development of foreign policy. An attempt of this kind inevitably invites the bitter opposition of partisans who are able to appeal with « effect to a big body of opinion in the Middle West and elsewhere which mistrusts and fears foreign entanglements. On tho other hand, conditions definitely favour a progressive development of American co-operation in international affairs. President Harding, who fought his first campaign as an opponent of the League, is an advocate of American membership in some sort of association of nations, and his Administration took the initiative in promoting the Washington treaties Many distinguished Republicans are in favour of their country accepting League membership with certain reservations; and some prominent men—Senator Borah, for example—who in 1920 fought tooth and nail against any such proposal, have since advocated policies involving a bolder intervention in foreign affairs than exPresident Wilson ever contemplated. \ .... It no doubt explains these developments that America is learning by experience that she has a great deal to gain, economically and in other respects, by helping to re-establish peace and settled order in the world. In his article which appeared on Saturday Mr. Lloyd George was undoubtedly right in ascribing the present weakness of the League of Nations to the absence of America from its membership, and also in his contention that the League has suffered in prestige ’ by its inability to avert the present critical development of Franco German relations. It would be a mistake, however, to assume that the only alternatives before the' League are its speedy and complete acceptance by all the leading nations of the world, or its more or less gradual collapse. Tho third possibility exists that tho League may attain by a series of progressive steps the position and standing that will make it an effective agency in promoting and safeguarding the peace of the world. . It is quite possible that the ultimate settlement of the reparations dispute, with which the League is meantime unable to deal, may help to bring America into such a relationship of co-operation with other Powers as the League exists to promote. Tho United States may be as little inclined as it was in 1920 to interfere in European political affairs. It has been hard hit in trade and in other ways, however, by the chaotic conditions existing in Europe, and it has been made fairly clear that America would cooperate in giving effect to a reasonable settlement of the reparations question. Before long possibilities in this direction may be put to a practical test. Arising out of M. Loucheur’s recent mission to Great Britain, hopes are entertained, according to the Paris Matin, that negotiations for a reparations settlement may be resumed “on a basis agreeable to France and likely to result in renewed unity on the Allied front.”

M. Loucheur has expressed an opinion that British views on reparations “are slowly changing and are now largely favourable to France.” The actual position, of course, is that the weight of British opinion has at all times been favourable to France in this' matter, and that’ the differences of opinion which came to a head at the Premiers’ Conference three months ago had reference solely to tho methods to be employed in exacting payment from Germany and the amount if was reasonable to exact.

It has at all times*been open to France to obtain active British support in a reparations policy approved by the British Government, and agreement with Britain on this question at the same time undoubtedly offers her the readiest means of enlisting whatever cooperation 'America is prepared to offer. Such an agreement on reparations would be welcome in its immediate bearing on the European outlook, and not less so as a very important step towards further developments in international co-operation.