More Peace Pacts

Dominion, Volume 31, Issue 104, 27 January 1938, Page 11

More Peace Pacts

Sir, —In to-day’s “Dominion” we read of Mr. Chamberlain’s latest proposals for a lasting peace in Europe, and there can be few in the British Empire who do not fervently wish him success at the proposed conference in June. But what of Germany? “It is here.” to use the words of Professor Cramb. ‘‘that Germany’s will to power comes into tragic conflict with England's will to peace . . . here is the element of discord — it is not in England herself.” And, he adds, “To me the most disquieting thing in our relations to Germany is our politicians’ fixed resolution to see things other than as they are.” One of these things “as they are” is the fact that “Germany will never sincerely cease arming. If England builds on the dream of Germany acquiescent, she is doomed to a bloody and terrible awakening, for it is not our colonies that Germany desires. It is a great central European State, with the British Isles as its conquered provinces.” Treitschke’e saying that it is the glory of an army which is a nation, and of a nation which is an army, has permeated the thought of every class in Germany and taught them not only to tolerate a Hitler who has enabled them to realise this ideal, but to glory in such a dictator—a dictator who has shown time and again that his disregard for treaties, covenants and pacts is an innate characteristic of himself and of the nation whoso mouthpiece he is. In hi s remarkable book, “Britain Faces Germany,” Mr. A. L. Kennedy, late assistant foreign editor of “The Times,’ deals very fully with this aspect of German diplomacy and warns Us that in qur dealings with that country' we should never forget “the secretiveness of German methods and the deceptive nature of German assurances —a characteristic, be it said, that ought always without fail to be borne in mind when dealing with the Reich even under the best of governments.”

It is this Teutonic deceitfulness that impelled Professor Cramb to write. “In treaty with an enemy that treaty is binding only so long as you can make your enemy see gleam behind the parchment the point of a sword; and the verdict of history upon alliances is unmistakable and explicit . . . peace is at best a truce on the battlefield of time." One can only hope that these things will be remembered at the coming conference if it ever takes place, which appears to be doubtful, and that it will net be forgotten that it still remains true, that “England must take upon herself the fulfilment of her destiny, depending upon herself alone for the .realisation of a destiny that is her destiny.’ and giving up “the dangerous habit of trusting to alliances and collective security.” continue to arm till once again she inspires thy respect that was hers till purblind pacifists and short-sighted politicians brought her into contempt in the eyes of those nations who see things as they :ire. — 1 i,ln ’ etC " 11. IRWIN. Tikoltino, H. 8.. January 25.