UNKNOWN

Dunstan Times, Issue 3149, 25 December 1922, Page 2

UNKNOWN

WTr Philip Hr'd women in Englund who PPEeir best to promote friendship netweon their country and th« United States are seriously disturbed by criticism that is coming across the Atlantic regarding British concessions to Turkey during the Near East crisis. One eminent American journalist, whose opinions are respected in Kngland for fearless truth telling, states in a long article that American opinion of British policy and character lias beeSn severely Knocked by the British Government's acceptance of Turkey's return to Europe, without adequate defence of the Christian minorities. England, he said, stood high in American opinion when, alone, her troops faced the Turks at Chanak and accepted the challenge to war, but ib dropped to zero when that war did not happen and the Turks, fresh from the bonfire of Smyrna, were allowed back to Constantinople and Thrace. The enthusiasm of Christian churches in America on behalf of England's warlike defence of Christian Europe against Mohammedan invasion was, he added, utterly chilled. If that is a true diagnosis of American opinion it is very disturbing, and will lead to a complete misunderstanding between American and British democracy. Liberal opinion in Great Britain believed for a long time that enlightened thought in America and the. very, instincts of the American people were steadily in favor of all efforts on liehalf of world peace and demobilisation of standing armies and) reduction of naval armaments. Did not the Washington -Conference uphold that ideal? Has not every word that has come from the White House on the subject of international policy been in the nature of a warning that, the United States desired a. peaceful spirit in Europe before interesting herself directly in its economic troubles? Only the" other day Hoover issued a solemn demand for payment of Euro-; pean debts, and expressed his belief that these could be fulfilled if the European nations were to establish themselves on a peace footing and reduce their armies and navies. With that attitude there is no quarrel among the majority of British people who are determined to avoid war if it is humanly, honorably possible to do si>. and t<> allay war fevers in the world wherever they may break out. But the American people cannot havo it both ways. They cannot accuse the British Empire of militarism in one breath and with the next upbraid it for avoiding an'ordeal by battle and making great concessions for the sake of peace. They cannot call upon England to reduce her army and fleet and pay her just debts and at the same time sicken with reproach because England, single-handed, with no promise or prospect of American support, or any other, relies on diplomacy rather than arms to avoid a conflict which would have spread like a raging fire throughout the East, cost vast sums of money and a new and terrible sacrifice of blood and, beyond any dwubt, threatened another world war. For they are only foolish and ignorant folk who believe war would have been restricted to Great Britain and Turkey. Behind Turkey is Russia, Egypt, Palestine, Mesopotamia, Syria, Persia, and India wouiki nave been feverstricken by the attack on Mohammedan troops in Asia Minor, after their victory over the Greeks. France was passionately opposed to British resistance of Turkish claims. Germany was watching and waiting. The Balkan nations were excited and bellicose. If Harington had not put an ironi restraint upon the young British soldiers surrounded by the Turks and under great provocation, England would now have been mobilising all her citizens, spending all that remains to her in wealth, which is not much. After that war Great Britain would pay no money over to America, as she is now doing. Her financial ruin would have been complete. All the world, I am certain, would have been ablaze before that war ended. At the present time the British Government, especially Lloyd George, is indicted by public opinion in> Great Britain, not for having avoided that war but for having dragged the nation so near its abyss by blundering diplomacy and provocative manifestoes. Deep tides of public opinion in England and Scotland are rising to overwhelm the statesmen who risked that chance of war when in the judgment of all classes it was unnecessary and avoidable. Is American opinion hostile to that manifestation of the peace spirit in Great Britain? If so it is greatly inconsistent and woefully misled. 1% was not cowardice but the common sense of the people of every class which forced the British Government to avoid hostilities. It was not by the surrender of honorable principles but by upholding the ideals of peace and conciliation, in the spirit of the Washington Conference, that England decided to refrain from war. Th© only point of principle, the freedom of the straits, was arready acknowledged by the Turks. Standing alone, without French support, England could not check the inevitable massacres of Christian, minorities in Constantinople and Asia Minor, which now, by military arrangements between British, French, and Turkish ofiicers, have been avoided. Misery beyond words, suffering that will'never be told, tragedy beyond imagination have befallen those millions of Christian refugees now in flight; but it is certain that if the war had happened their agony would have soaked the earth. For British battalions fighting alone would have had to concentrate at strategic points and would not havfe been in numbers sufficient to police the'great territories where the Turks, inflamed by passion, had Christian communities at their mercy. The question which England wants to ask American peoples is this: Are the United: States ready and willing even now to fight with Great Britain in a war against the living power of Islam? If riot then why this criticism of England's endeavor to avert that by statesmanship ? That is the attitude of public opinion in Great Britain. Personairy I feel that this problem goes deeper than that. It is not, in my mind', whether the United States will support Great Britain in war but whether American opinion will support it in a policy of peace? And not only peace between England, France, and Germany but peace in the Eastern world. Europe cannot disarm if the East Ib aflame. Demobilisation of the standing armies and reduction of fleets cannot go hand in hand with crusades against the Mohammedans and a rule of the sword. It must be one thing or the other, and public opinion must either reassert rule by force or rule> by agreement. In Europe there is a steadily growing conviction in Liberal opinion that force may be limited to police measures against actions which thieaten peace and public security. That is the supreme idea to which .wo are all groping our way, and which one day may be fulfilled 1 by the Leaguie ot Nations acting as an international court; of justice in behalf of all nations. Why is that ideal immediately devoid of power Why is the League of Nations utterly impotent in such a crisis as that threatened by Turkey? Very

largely, it is because the' United States is outside that council l of nations and has given no spiritual l or diplomatic support to its arbitrations and awards. In Great Britain to-day there is a political struggle in progress of extreme importance, not only to British citizens but much more to humanity at large. What is being fought out is not the ascendancy of one political party or another, or a chance of victory or defeat for Lloyd George, but the tremendbus question between a. war policy or a peace policy. If Lloyd George goes down it will be because he seemed to favor war, thereby violating his previous records, on behalf of European peace'. Hut another aspect of the case lurks behind' that decision. It is the question of British friendship with Franco, which is terribly strained by a kind of personal feud 1 between Lloyd George and French opinion. France has made the British Premier a kind of whipping boy for all their disappointments and disillusions over the peace of Versailles. The French press insulted him with deliberation l and intense and past*ionate hatred. They drew sharp distinction between Lloyd George's policy and' British opinion when as a matter of face they closely coincided. Irritated by this vendetta Lloyd George lost his temper more than once under extreme provocation and slashed back. He was personally justified, but as a representative of the British Empire his sharp words to France were disastrous in effect. He gives any Government that follows him a supreme chance of reaffirming the Entente Cordials and settling all differences on a new basis. It is the firm conviction of the British people that this must be done at all costs to secure future peace. But it cannot be done, in my judgment, unless tbe United States acts as arbitrator in the matter of German reparations ami, as the greatest economic Power in the world, uses its influence for world settlement.