PARIS PROPOSALS

Dominion, Volume 29, Issue 71, 17 December 1935, Page 9

PARIS PROPOSALS

Endeavours to Draw Up Basis of Agreement

BRITISH WHITE PAPER

(Britlbh Official Wireless., Rugby, December 15. A White Paper issued by the Government in anticipation of Thursday’s House of Commons debate contains, in addition to the text of the proposals drafted in Paris as a basis for negotiations for a settlement of the ItaloAbyssinian dispute which were published last night in Geneva, instructions sent by the Foreign Secretary to the British Ambassador in Rome and the British Minister iu Addis Ababa on December 10 regarding the proposals and their submission to the Italian and Ethiopian Governments. These are preceded by the report of the League Committee of Five on September 18 last and the respective replies thereto of the Italian and Ethiopian representatives, and by a telegram from Sir Samuel Hoare' at Geneva describing the session of the Co-ordination Committee on November 2, at which the efforts of the French and British Governments to promote a settlement of the conflict were welcomed. The White Paper ends with the texts of the speeches delivered by M. Laval and Mr. Eden in the Committee of Eighteen on Thursday. Tn the telegrams of December 10 the British representatives were instructed to make jointly with their French colleagues, a communication to Signor Mussolini and the Emperc’-. which in each case begins by stating that before the meeting of the Committee of Eighteen arranged for December. 12 the British and French Governments, acting in accordance with the wishes expressed in the Co-ordination Committee on November 2, and being anxious to see an early end put to the Italo-Abyssinian conflict, “have endeavoured to draw up a basis of agreement.” Italian Aspirations. In the telegram to Rome the Governments give an assurance of their anxiety “to take account of Italian aspirations in so far as these can be made compatible with the principles of the Covenant of the League of Nations and respect for Ethiopian sovereignty.” In both communications they state “they are convinced that an arrangement to be come to should be drawn up under the direction of the Committee of Five, ■which received from the Council of the League of Nations in September last Its mandate of conciliation, and they have decided to make certain suggestions urgently to that committee.” They add that in order to make sure that Signor Mussolini and the Emperor would accept a basis of negotiations “in principle without prejudice to the results of the discussions which would subsequently take place before the committee.” they are communicating proposals to them in strict confidence. These proposals are set out in an annex, the text of which is already known. Convinced that Signor Mussolini and ihe Emperor will appreciate the friendly spirit which inspired their communication, the Governments address to each of them an urgent appeal that “he should without delay take part in negotiations for improving the international situation with most favourable prospects.” To Rome they joined to this appeal a statement that “they hope the reply of the Italian Government may reach them within a period which in view of the imminence of the meetings nt Geneva may be as short as possible.” If. as they hope, this reply in principle is favourable, the French and United Kingdom Governments will immediately take the necessary steps in order that the Committee of Five niav he called together on December 12.' In that case the meeting of the committee might modify the object of the Committee of Eighteen, which is fixed for the same day. Sir Samuel Hoare and M. Pierro Laval attach the greatest importance tc learning at the same time from Signor Mussolini whether he is ready to arrange for the collaboration of the Italian Government with the Committee of Five. Appeal to Emperor. ( The appeal to the Emperor was reinforced in the following terms:— “They hope his Majesty will let them know as soon as possible whether he agrees to negotiate on these conditions and is ready to arrange for the collaboration of the Ethiopian Government with the Committee of Five.” Both telegrams conclude with a reference to the proposal that Abyssinia should have an outlet to the sea, ami the representatives are advised that if the solution suggested of the cession by Italy of the port of Assab and a corridor thereto would in their view militate against acceptance of the basis, they may say, failing such an arrangement : "The Government of the United Kingdom and the French Government, are prepared to facilitate Ethiopia’s access to the sea in the manner which they stated to the Committee of Five.” The Foreign Secretary sent an additional telegram to Sir Sydney Barton in which the latter was instructed to, use his utmost influence to induce the Emperor to give careful and favourable consideration to the proposals and on no account lightly to reject them. The message adds: “I feel sure he will give further proof of hi s statesmanship by realising the advantage of the opportunity of negotiation which they afford.” “Hardly Dispel Anxiety.” The publication of the terms of the Paris proposals advanced as a basis for negotiations to end the war in Abyssinia, and the reply of the Ethiopian Government, are the subjects of leading articles in all the newspapers. With regard to the variation of the official text from the previous reports the general feeling seems to be, in the words of “The Times,” that “the full text of the Paris proposals will hardly dispel the anxiety aroused by the forecasts when they first made thffir appearance In the French newspapers.” The “Daily Herald” says: “Details are irrelevant. The proposals are damned not in their details but by their principles.” The comment of the majority of the papers is highly critical, but the “Daily Mail” and the “Daily Express,’’ which have consistently opposed the Government policy of standing by League obligations in this dispute, now support the proposals, which they treat as a sensible escape from the dangers of League action. The “Morning Post” also inclines to regard the proposals as a realist solution resulting from the choice by the Government of the path of conciliation, and thia paper has a sharp rejoinder to certain foreign critics who, it says, •when they thought Great Britain was taking a strong line accused her of exploiting the League for Imperial ends. Now that she takes the other line they

accuse her of betraying the League to a shameful surrender.” The Liberal “News-Chronicle” writes: “In view of the attitude so bravely taken up by the Government both in Geneva and in this country during the election, it is extremely difficult to discover what, motives have led the British Foreign Secretary and the British Government to give the plan any sort of endorsement. The country, which ha s the greatest faith in Mr. Baldwin,' will anxiously await further enlightenment, and the only fair thing to do is to suspend final judgment till the Prime Minister explains what he had in mind the other day in the House of Commons when he said criticism and opposition would cease if he were free to speak.” Discussing possible explanations of the Government’s attitude, the “Daily Telegraph” considers that while these conjectures might justify refusal to extend sanctions any further, they do not make clear why it was thought necessary to put forward peace terms on the present lines. The “Manchester Guardian” considers the Abyssinian reply adroit, and noting that the Emperor puts himself in the position of a belligerent refusing to negotiate and transferring the burden of- conciliation to the League, it adds “from which it should never have been taken.”

“WILL GIVE NOTHING”

Abyssinian Resistance Stiffening

(Received December 17, 12.50 a.m.)

London, December 16. The Addis Ababa correspondent of the “Daily Telegraph” reports that leading members of the Government say that the air-raids on Bessie clearly are intended to demoralise the Abyssinians so that they may all the more readily jump at any peace terms. In reality they will have the opposite effect, “since we are now determined to give nothing. . a |y, if she wants our land must take it by force. We fear nothing except aeroplanes. We have learned how to avoid casualties during the raids. During the next fifteen days the Italians will feel our strength.”

WORLD WAR HAZARD

Moral Triumph Predicted For Mr. Baldwin

“SANCTIONS ARE DEAD”

London, December 15. The “Sun-Herald” agency says it is now widely accepted that when Mr. Stanley Baldwin said, “My lips aye not yet unsealed,” he meant that if Sir Samuel Hoare had rejected the peace terms he would have plunged the Empire into war. Some papers even express the opinion that Mr. Baldwin will emerge from Thursday’s debate with a moral triumph never surpassed in the history of the Commons. Mr. J. L. Garvin, in a powerful article in the “Observer,” says: “Further sanctions intended to throttle Italv and hamstring her armies wouffi set fire to the world and plunge us all in a desperate European conflict in the New Year which would be the beginning of another world war. All statesmen responsible, therefore, would earn everlasting guilt, the ill-starred League would perish, Japan would dominate Asia, Nazism would dominate Europe. We are only beginning to reconstitute oui- defences, and we are much worse prepared than in 1914. Nobody knows what would become of the Empire. It might disappear. Out ordinary communications with Australia and India through the Mediterranean would be suspended for a long time, and if Italy was permanently hostile we would never afterwaro be safe, as before sanctions armed reinforcements already have created farreaching difficulties for the Empire with Egyptian nationalists.” Competent statesmanship has nothing to put in the place of the peace proposal and it will go through now or later in its main shape. Some settlement of this broad character is the only way out. Mr. Garvin concludes with a view which is now gaining adherents despite the storm against the Government, which Is unabated. "Sir Samuel Hoare bad no alternative to the Paris plan which will prevail sooner or later. Sanctions are dead.”