HAND OF ITALY

Evening Post, Volume CXXI, Issue 140, 15 June 1936, Page 9

HAND OF ITALY

SHOWN ON THE DANUBE

POLITICAL JEALOUSY REMAINS

HINDERING. STABILITY

' Signor Mussolini summoned hi Austrian and Hungarian clients t< meet him in conference at Rome wel before Herr Hitler violated tin Locarno Treaty by sending troop: into the Rhineland, said the "Manches ter Guardian" editorially recently. Th< meeting was intended primarily as £ demonstration, to tell the world tha after six months of aggression in Abys sinia the dictator was not in complete diplomatic Coventry. The date was fixed exactly two yea.-s after Italy Austria, and Hungary had concluded the consultative and economic agree' ments known as the Rome Protocols Since then consultations have been frequent, especially in view of the tremendous upheaval which Austria has experienced since the murder ol Dollfuss; the commercial agreements have been not ineffective in expanding the three-sided trade; and the two smaller countries have proved their gratitude by refusing, almost alone in Europe, to apply economic sanctions against the condemned aggressor. But it is only because of the Franco-Ger-man lull that thoughts can be turned for a moment from the Rhine to the Danube. Herr Hitler has stolen the thunder, and as compared with the London conversations Mussolini's fireworks in Rome seem like a damp squib. Mussolini brought half the Senate and most of his tame deputies to meet his visitors at the station; banquets have been held, and the University of Rome presented General Gomboes,' the" Hungarian Premier, with a bust of his host, a concrete reminder for his Budapest home if the direction of his hero-worship should chance to stray towards Berlin. Dr. Schuschnigg, the Austrian Chancellor, beset by internal as well as external cares, was more appropriately given a bust of the pessimistic but philosophic Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius. But ceremonies apart, little more serious seems to have emerged from the conversations than the strengthening of the Protocols of "March, 1934. VALUE. If this proves true, small contribution will have been made to the solution of the problems of Central Europe and of the Balkans. What is chiefly needed for the prosperity of these youthful nations is economic and financial stability. The old Austrian Empire which preceded them, whatever its faults, was a large Free Trade area, and town and country were able to exchange their goods without hindrance. Today political

jealousies interfere with economic cc operation; Austria is afraid of Naz Germany; Hungary sacrifices every thing to her ambitions for frontie revision at the expense of the Littli Entente (Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia and Rumania); Yugoslavia is suspiciou of Italy and is suspected by Bulgaria Czechoslovakia, which has three mil lion Germans, and is a democratic is land in a Fascist sea, dreads Pan-Ger manism in its modem forms. Yet, ii spite of political unrest, the last twc vears have seen some economic ad vance. The Little Entente has strength cned itself economically as well a: politically, industrial Czechoslovakia has been able to buy substantially more foodstuffs from her allies, and were it not for sanctions, which have reduced Italy's purchasing power, the three signatories of the Rome Protocols might equally have improved their economic position. The ideal situation would be, as Dr. Hodza, the Czechoslovakia Premier, has been in sisting, an agreement between the twc groups—between the Little Entente and the three Powers of the Rome Conference. NO AID. But Italy at present, and possibly in its self-sufficient future, is a complication rather than a help on the Danube. Clearly it would be best ii the Danubian Powers could work out their own destiny. But when in 1932 France advocated such a restricted grouping both Italy and Germany were concerned about her political aims. Now it is reported from Rome that Hungary, likewise for political reasons, is opposing herself rigidly to even an economic understanding being made with the Little Entente before her "revisionist" claims are discussed. If that is the Hungarian attitude it deserves little sympathy. Her political grievances would command greater respect were she willing to enter into more friendly relations with her neighbours. But the faults may not all be on one side, and there is at least the consolation that Austria, which still remains, from the Western European point of view, the principal dangerpoint on the Danube, has already shown some readiness to' co-operate with the Little Entente. Recently Dr. Schushnigg and Dr. Hodza signed a protocol which forms the basis for new trade and arbitration treaties, a step which, made in spite of some remonstrations from their respective friends, should not pass unnoticed. Thus Austria now has her feet in two camps. The ultimate aim for the Danubian countries should clearly be a low tariff group composed of the Little Entente, Austria, and Hungary, and open to adhesion by all other countries, especially Bulgaria, Italy, and Germany. The more optimistic may even envisage this Austro-Czechoslovak protocol as a move in that direction. Unfortunately the danger remains that some unwise political decision from one of the dissatisfied Powers in Central Europe will interfere with any such advance. Italy, and Germany have both disregarded treaties and thereby added to uncertainty on the Danube. It is no wonder that Ihe Little Entente has taken such a firm line on the League Council in the past six months; they fear that their turn to play the victim may be next. IX Italy has at Rome encouraged Austria and Hungary to re-arm heavily in defiance of their treaties or, worse still, supported the idea of restoring the Habsburg rule in those two contries— a plan to which the Little Entente is inflexibly opposed—she will have stirred up trouble that no amount of trade and "consultation" can undo.