Evening Post. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 1936.

Evening Post, Volume CXXI, Issue 36, 12 February 1936, Page 10

Evening Post. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 1936.

"War talk is an immense game of bluff and the answer is to be strong and stand fast while the League^ is calmly performing duties for which it exists." These reassuring words from an experienced and sagacious statesman may be remembered when reviewing the alarming, or alarmist, news of yesterday and today. General Smuts, in the neutrality debate in the South African Parliament, counselled his people to "be strong and stand fast." reference was to the fear that a sanctions policy would provoke "a greater war. There are few statesmen living whose words should command more attention. When the Great War broke out General Smuts was a leader in South Africa; when it ended he was a leader in the Empire. He was one of the architects of the League of Nations, and now, though no longer in active leadership in his own country, he has attained an eminence in world politics which few of his contemporaries can equal. Freed from the restrictions imposed by office, he speaks with the authority of an untrammelled'observer.

Despite this reassurance there is in the recent news sufficient to cause the gravest uneasiness. "Never have I found such widespread foreboding of war as during the Continental journey from which I have just returned," writes Mr. Ward Price in the "Daily Mail." "Things are far worse than they were in 1914."

I had an hour's talk with Signor Mussolini recently. It left an impression of the danger Britain runs in creating community of interests between Germany, Japan, and Italy, all of which are intent on acquiring [colonies.

This report has partial confirmation in news from two different and completely independent sources, the Berlin correspondent of the "Daily Telegraph" and the diplomatic correspondent of the "Manchester Guardian.** The former reports that the future of the Locarno Treaty is believed to be the subject of talks which are progressing between^Berlin and Rome.

It is considered that an emergency might arise from the Abyssinian war which would cause Italy to withdraw from the Treaty. This would afford Germany an opportunity of 'denouncing the Ehin eland 'demilitarisation protocol.

Today the "Guardian's" diplomatic writer records "a most serious view" in British official quarters of German re-armament. It imposes on Britain an urgent duty to "strengthen her own defences and use every effort to strengthen the collective system.

The general opinion in Whitehall seems to be that if Britain remains aloof from Europe a general war is inevitable. War may be averted if Britain is sufficiently strong and also takes an active part in the consolidation of collective security.

The writer also mentions Germany's aim to recover the demilitarised zone before the end of the year.

In this crisis there are three courses that present themselves to the friends of peace, and particularly to the British Empire: avoidance (meaning to run away from the danger), prevention, and appeasement. Avoidance of the issue would be directly at variance with General Smuts's advice to be strong and stand fast. It was in part the policy behind the HoareLaval proposals, and it was decisively rejected by British opinion. It might give a short truce, but never enduring peace. Pmvention means ' that Britain must be ready to play her part by restoring her own strength and rebuilding the strength of the League. She is preparing to repair the gaps in her own defences, and her Continental policy is firmly and definitely based upon collective security. The most hopeful passage in the "Manchester Guardian's" review of the situation is that which records progress in this direction. "The close Anglo-French relations

and the signs of concord between England and Russia," it is slated, "have already persuaded Rumania and Poland that the collective system is not die shaky structure it formerly appeared to be." Prevention, however, cannot be a complete and final remedy. It can at best deter the nations that are disposed to plunge the world into the abyss of war. It can give time for the application of the true remedy— appeasement. More and more it appears that permanent appeasement must be sought through a means of satisfying the hunger of "the crowded countries. Sir Samuel Hoare made an approach to this solution in his famous Geneva speech, and it has been discussed widely since. Then it was Italy's need for raw materials and an outlet for her people that demanded attention. , Now the expansionist aims of Germany and Japan, have also been put forward. Satisfaction for these aims cannot be wholly assured by the simple self-denying measures advocated by Mr. Lansbury, even if those measures were within the realm of practical politics. Signor Mussolini, according to "Pertinax," would at the outset have refused Abyssinia if it had been offered to him on a silver tray. He wanted to conquer it. Similarly, now, the anticipated demand of Germany for colonies "does not concern raw materials, but prestige." But if the supply of raw materials is assured (and this is more a question of economic reconstruction than re-j distribution of territory), and the land-hungry nations are, through the League, given their part in mandate administration, will they resort to war and its ruin in pursuit of an illusory prestige? The answer will lie in the power of the peace-keeping nations to prevent such madness. The removal of legitimate grievances is not alone sufficient to remove the causes of war. There must be the will and the ability to "be strong and stand fast" in resistance of powerlusting militarism.