PARIS PEACE PROPOSALS

Evening Post, Issue 149, 20 December 1935, Page 7

PARIS PEACE PROPOSALS

DISCUSSION UNDER THREAT OF WAR

ANXIETY FOR PRESERVING THE LEAGUE •

BRITAIN ALONE READY TO ACT

'(British Official Wireless.) (Received December 20, noon.) RUGBY, December 19. The House of Commons was crowded in all parts this afternoon in anticipation of the statement by Sir Samuel Hoare, who last night resigned the Foreign Secretary ship,, and of the debate on the Labour Party's motion condemning the Paris peace proposals. v The Prince of Wales occupied the seat over the clock, and foreign representatives and distinguished strangers filled the galleries.' . ■ ■ . ••• Sir Samuol Hoare, who was warmly received, rose immediately after questions. He began with an allusion to the misfortune that bodily accident, added to bodily weariness, had laid him aside when he should have been explaining the position to his colleagues and to the country, and continued: "Ever since J. have been at the Foreign Office I have been obsessed with the urgent necessity of doing everything in my power to prevent a European conflagration, and the no less urgent duty of doing everything to prevent an isolated war between Great Britain and Italy. When the General Election came to an end the war had already been in progress for some weeks. We had done our best to prevent this outbreak. I myself had done everything within my power to. mobilise world opinion against war. lii spite of our efforts war had broken out, and every day it continued it involved the world in a graver and more dangerous situation. There were evil reactions everywhere—in the East as well as in the West, in China, in Egypt, and in Europe. In view of these facts I did everything in my power to make a settlement possible, whilst loyally continuing the , policy of sanctions. .. NEW SITUATION OF OIL EMBARGO. "After the election we were engaged in our double task of taking our full share in collective action, and in the other task, imposed on us by the League itself, of trying to find a basis of settlement, and particularly we were concentrating on the second task in view of the situation I saw inevitably developing. In both fields of collective action and of peaceful negotiations we reached a turning point about a fortnight ago. It was clear that a new situation, was about to be created by the question of an oil embargo. On all sides we received reports which no responsible Government could disregard that Italy would look upon an oil embargo as a military sanction, or an act against her involving war. RESULT OF ISOLATED ACTION. "Let me make our position quite clear. We have no fear whatever as a nation of any Italian threats. If the Italians attacked us we should retaliate, and judging: from our past history, we should retaliate with full success. What was in our minds was something very different—that isolated action of this kind taken by one Power without, it may be, the full support of other Powers would, it seemed to me, almost Inevitably lead to,a dissolution of the League. "It was in these circumstances that I went to Paris. I was pressed on all sides to discuss the position with M. Laval and attempt to reach with him a common basis for peace discussions. It was in an atmosphere of threat of war that the discussions took place., It was in an atmosphere in which a majority, indeed the totality, of the member States appeared to be opposed to military action. , BRITAIN THE ONLY STATE TO MOVE. "Within five days the Committee of Eighteen was to meet to settle a date for an oil embargo. I could not see how that decision could be justifiably postponed unless negotiations were started. I felt that to have agreed to a postponement without a really justifiable reason would have done very great harm to the prestige of the League. ' . "It was a choice between full co-operation of all the member States or the kind of unsatisfactory compromise contemplated in the suggestions M. Laval and I put up in Paris. It was an atmosphere in which we knew that while the member States had for the most part been prepared to take their part in economic sanctions, not a single one except ourselves had moved a ship, an aeroplane, or a soldier to meet the possible emergency. It was an atmosphere in which} Anglo-French co-operation seemed absolutely essential if any peace negotiations were to succeed, indeed, if collective action was to continue." Sir Samuel explained that the Paris proposals seemed to him and M. Laval the only basis upon which it was even remotely likely that peace discussions could start. It was the minimum basis upon which the French Government was prepared to proceed. He thought it so important to. start negotiations that he could not withhold provisional assent, much as he disliked some features of the proposals. . Sir Samuel Hoare described the proposals in detail with a view to showing that they were not so favourable to Italy as some alleged and that they were within the framework of the suggestions of the Committee of Five. " SHARING OF ATTENDANT RISKS. In conclusion, he said he was not satisfied, now that the situation was more tense as a result of the pressure of sanctions, that it was sufficiently clear that all the attendant risks were to be fully shared by all the League members. He said this because without the active co-operation of all the members collective security was impossible and the League would dissolve. "For three months this country has been alone in action, though that action Was precautionary," he said. "No one else in Europe has moved a ship or a man. I say that now the negotiations have failed we must have something more than these general protestations of loyalty to the League." Sir Samuel said he felt he had not the confidence of the great body of opinion in the country which was essential to a Foreign Secretary. He hoped his successor would have better luck. The speaker was deeply moved in his closing words, and left the House a few minutes after finishing his. speech.