London Letter THE BELGIAN PARADOX

Dominion, Volume 30, Issue 45, 17 November 1936, Page 9

London Letter THE BELGIAN PARADOX

Return to Neutrality OTHER POWERS TROUBLED (By J. A. Mtilgan and G. S. Cox.) [Air Mail.] London, October 24. The record of the western Locarno Powers is becoming something like the rhyme of the “Ten Little Nigger Boys.” Originally there were five—Germany, Italy, Belgium, France and England. Germany “invaded” the Rhineland, and after long exchanges of notes and questionnaires, it was agreed that a meeting of the Locarno Powers would be held to discuss the question and to make a new European settlement. It is the prospect of this meeting that has determined Anglo-French politics for the last few months —and particularly at Geneva. Germany and Italy now say that any meeting in the near future would be premature and give no indication of wanting to attend at any time. Last week, the smallest of the five Powers, Belgium, in a policy speech made by her popular young King Leopold, forecast a return to her old neutrality, and the cancellation of her military agreements with France. There was great activity in London and Paris, recalling of ambassadors for instructions, and further speeches in Belgium, ostensibly modifying the original pronouncement, but leaving it substantially the same. At the end of a rather disturbed and contradictory week, the position seems to be briefly as follows.

The French, so the Belgians say. ought not to be worried. If Belgian neutrality is observed, so much the better; France can defend the almost impregnable Maginot line which runs along the whole of the German frontier. If. on the other hand, Belgium is attacked. her military arrangements with France immediately come into force. In effect, the Belgian declaration is another wedge driving the FrancoSoviet pact apart. All Europe sees clearly now that Germany wants a war in the east, and, under the present system of alliances. France would immediately be involved, taking Belgium with her into war. The Belgians want to return to isolationist neutrality. Belgian Resists.

A realisation of the internal situation of Belgium also helps to explain this latest move. There, a rising Fascist party—the Rexists—led by M. Degrelle, have been gradually threatening the Government. A monster meeting of 250,000 Rexists has just been forbidden by M. Van Zeeland, the Belgian Prime Minister, under the threat of Labour Party strikes throughout the country. The Rexists have taken as a main plank in their platform this same isolationist antiSoviet line, and have been finding a great deal of support for it. King Leopold’s speech was an attempt to take this support away from them, but in entrusting the actual declaration to the King, its sponsors made the new policy far too definite and the speech Itself had all the uncompromising bluntness of a pre-war German diplomatic pronouncement. Degrelle’s Rexists are a new Fascist party drawing mainly on the lower middle classes for support and advocating something half-way between Nazism and benevolent autocracy. Degrelle himself is probably the youngest party leader in Europe, aged only 26, a slight, dark, handsome man, rather like a smaller edition of Oswald Mosley. So long as conditions in Belgium remain moderately prosperous, as they are at present, the party is not likely to make great progress. But England and France will continue to be troubled by this renewed assumption of neutrality. British air strategy is very dependent upon air patrol and air bases in Belgian territory. For example, when the Hendon air pageant took place this year and the east coast air squadrons in England were depleted, French and Belgian squadrons covered the Flanders coast during that week-end by automatic arrangement, If this and similar agreements are now to be abrogated, it will be a serious matter for the two great western Powers. Germany and Italy.

To Berlin this week went Count Ciano, Mussolini’s son-in-law, said to be “next in succession” in the corporate State and famous in the Abyssinian war as leader of the “Desperate Squadron.” (It was rumoured that too much publicity was being given to him there. He came home half-way through the war, but has since figured largely in the news as Italy’s Minister for Foreign Affairs.) The Itaio-Germau entente is at the moment closer than ever, as all their actions reveal. It is greatly troubling the small nations of central Europe, and under its threat Rumania and Yugoslavia seem anxious to draw away from their commitments with France. The same close understanding of the two great Fascist Powers is the main stumbling block to a Locarno settlement.

But responsible opinion is occupied in pointing out that this understanding is not nearly as close nor as firm as it looks. There is always Austria—at the moment Italian in government, German in sentiment —to divide the two countries: Germany will be slow to trust Italy as an ally after the experience of the Groat War: and strategically Italy would be only a liability to Germany in another war. The apparent alliance is a useful lever, and gives Germany and Italy the upper, hand in Europe at present: under pressure it would probably look less imposing. Italy has just handed Britain a note in reply to the Locarno proposals, and though the terms of this are not yet published it is believed to contain Italy’s terms for co-operation, including recognition of the Abyssinian conquest and a fairly free hand in rhe eastern Mediterranean in return for an unmolested route to India. What England will think of this remains to be seen; hut it. is probably true to say that public opinion will be greatly against their acceptance. There is genuine friendship in many quarters for Germany, tempered by a dislike of her methods and regime, but England as a whole has not yet forgiven or for gotten the Abyssinian war and the tension which existed between the two countries at this time last year eoub’ easily be aroused again.