Evening Post. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 19, 1933. ITALY THE ARBITER

Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 95, 19 October 1933, Page 12

Evening Post. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 19, 1933. ITALY THE ARBITER

At Whitehall an "almost Sabbath calm" and the assurance that there was "no reason why London should get excited," at Berlin the dramatic dissolution of Germany's ' dummy Reichstag, the feverish activity of her dictator in launching "statement after statement throughout the day railing at the Powers of Europe and demanding the right to. equal armaments," and Nazi brass bands parading the streets escorted by cheering crowds—these represented the opposite extremes of the national reactions of Europe to the colossal blunder by which Germany has interrupted the work of the peacemakers at Geneva. But to regard the calm at Whitehall as either bluff or indifference would be as absurd as to suppose that Herr Hitler- means all that he says or that he is really ready for the war which on the lips d'f any less hysterical orator his language would be taken ■to mean. " The national contrast to .which we have referred is further emphasised by the broadcast speech of the British Foreign Secretary which is reported today. Even more completely than Mr. Mac Donald himself Sir John Simon represents the opposite pole in'thought and speech, if not in character also, to the Nazi leader. He is entirely lacking in the emotional exuberance of the" orator, and a certain coldness of manner, which' has not escaped the notice of his own phlegmatic countrymen, seems to be one of the main reasons why he has been unable to repeat the remarkable success of Mr. Arthur Henderson as a "persona grata" at Geneva. But in the marshalling of facts and arguments a man who has for years been one of the leaders of the English Bar stands second to none, and it is facts and arguments, and not the firer works of oratory, that the occasion demands. It is indeed not the coldness but the calmness of the British temperament that is most conspicuous in Sir John Simon's; speech. He has told in simple and unvarnished language, and without recriminations or innuendoes of any kind, the story of the disarmament negotiations up to the point when Germany astonished every. other nation represented at Geneva by her decision to.withdraw. One might hope that the obvious good faith and good will of the narrative and of the appeal to reason which is based upon it might go far, if not towards convincing the reason, at any rate in abating the fury, of the German people, if only their Government considered it to be any part of its duty to let them know the truth. Upon the other Powers the effect of the speech must be excellent, for it at once gives them a lead in quiet, non-provocative, and hopeful argument, and dispels any suspicion that the calm of Britain means that she is blind to the danger or disposed to claim any superior, virtue over .those who by temperament or situation are prevented from taking it so quietly. On the last two points Sir John Simon was perfectly candid. He had nothing to say of the "as in 1914" type, of which even in England we have had too much, but he quoted and approved the statement of Lord Cecil, who, like himself, is neither a Jingo nor an alarmist, that there is "a very genuine anxiety" which "it would be folly to ignore." There is more anxiety in England about the international situation than for ma,ny years past. And on the Continent the feeling is more acute—everybody knows why.;, "■..' ' . For the British reader, who does not need much evidence to convince him of the bona fides, the consistency and the patience with which Sir John Simon and his colleagues have been leading the discussion of the British draft at Geneva, a special interest attaches to his reference to the attitude of Italy. From the standpoints of both Britain and France the foreign policy of Italy has for a considerable time been unsatisfactory. She has had no serious trouble With Britain, but her rivalry with France has been keen and sometimes dangerous. A few years ago it led to several ugly frontier incidents; it assumed a highly dangerous form when the answers to M. Briand's proposal of May 17, 1930, for European Federal Union revealed a fairly even division of the European Governments with France at the head of one group and Italy arid Germany at the head of the other, and with the question of treaty revision as the main line of cleavage. When the Nazis came into power Herr Hitler received a message of congratulation from the Italian Government, but, if we are not mistaken, from no other, and certainly from no other, that mattered. When the Nazis went mad, Signor Mussolini was placed in a very difficult position, and his proposal in March of a Four-Power Pact in which Italy, France, and Germany, were to be associated with

Britain for the protection of the peace of Europe, was taken to indicate that he recognised the need for a new alignment. But though, since the Pact was signed in June, Germany has gone madder than ever, it has proved to be a dead letter. Italy would not even join with Britain and France in» protesting against the outrageous campaign with which Germany was threatening the independence, of Austria, and the peace of Europe, >and her "friendly : representations" have" proved, as futile as the joint protests of Britain and France. ; '.'.''■■ ' But the climax of German madness which was' recorded at Geneva on Saturday makes solid amends for all the fears that it has excited by encouraging1 the hope that Italy may at last .recognise her responsibilities as the arbiter of the peace of Europe and inform - Germany' by "friendly ' representations" which can no longer be misunderstood that she has gone far enough. It is a hope which does not yet justify confidence, but the last 'few days have brought a good deal of evidence to support it. There is first the fact that Germany does not appear to have received any . 'support from Italy 'during the negotiations which she has now broken off, and that on the fatal Saturday— whether before or after Germany's decision is immaterial—the Italian delegate said that "Italy approves in the main of Sir John Simon's views." Then there is ihe highly important statement from the positive side in Sir John's speech now before us that "an approach to a common point „of view between France and Italy was undoubted." To this may be added the general purport of the messages from Rome and Geneva during the last few days. It ,was understood at Geneva on Monday that "Signor Mussolini is doing his utmost to induce him [Herr Hitler] to change his policy." Finally, there is yesterday's report from Rome:— ' Signor Mussolini hotly contradicted a report that he was determined to uphold the German case. '*I uphold neither Germany nor anyone else,"1 he said.^ "The situation, should be met ■by the united wisdom of all the Governments concerned." ' It is true that in form it is only a judicial attitude that Signor Mussolini professes, but the implied disapproval of Germany's breakaway is clear. The Franco-Italian understanding to which Sir John Simon refers would enable the FourPower Pact to operate and give peace a solid basis at last.