Evening Post. THURSDAY, JANUARY 21,1937. IS IT A TURNING-POINT ?

Evening Post, Volume CXXIII, Issue 17, 21 January 1937, Page 8

Evening Post. THURSDAY, JANUARY 21,1937. IS IT A TURNING-POINT ?

Continental reactions to Mr. Anthony Eden's speech provide an illuminating commentary upon its inner meaning. In Paris the speech is hailed with complete satisfaction as support for France. M. Blum's newspaper "Populaire" declares that the speech constitutes an event of the highest importance and the British foreign policy has reached a turningpoint, the essential factor of which is closer co-operation with democratic France. The rest of the Press! also interprets the speech as favour-j able to France and contends that if Signor Mussolini and _ General Goering run counter to British support in their Mediterranean and Spanish policies they must be disappointed. Inspired Gertjian comment confirms this interpretation of Mr. Eden's speech. Berlin says the speech was made to the wrong address and charges Mr. Eden with lack of understanding of Germany and of appreciation of Herr Hitler's services to European peace. Further, Berlin challenges Mr. Eden's right to put Italo-German evolutionary interest in Spain on the same footing as the Soviet revolutionary interest. These comments are based mainly upon that part of his speech in which Mr. Eden specially commended the French Government Bill to prohibit the enlistment in or the departure from French territory of volunteers for service in Spain, and remarked that he had no hesitation in saying if all the Governments would place themselves equally in that position they would be nearer to agreement than in fact they were. It may be questioned, nevertheless, whether French hopes and German fears have not led to more being read into this speech than Mr. Eden intended. France is nervous; has always been nervous since 1919, and this nervousness raises new suspicions. Of this we have had several examples quite recently. The report of German activity in Morocco proved to be, if not groundless, at least exaggerated, though it may be that the French correspondent's report scotched a plan for German penetration. Yesterday the Paris correspondent of the "Daily Telegraph" mentioned French fears that the Mussolini-Goering conversations might be the prelude to a concerted move by Italy and Germany to isolate France from her allies in the East and Central Europe. Unfortunately this is a fear that cannot be removed by throwing the territory open to inspection by foreign attaches, as was done with the report of Moroccan preparations. Diplomatic preparations are underground. Moreover, visible results are consistent with, though not necessarily evidence of, diplomatic intervention. An unsettled world, disturbed by post-War territorial changes and economic nationalism, and for the most part not firmly based upon the democratic system of Government, has been tempted to seek salvation in the rival systems of Fascism or Communism. As the "Round Table" wrote in December:

The conflict between Communism and Fascism is tending to extend. It is an important element in the Far Eastern situation. It is beginning to align certain of the less important States Of Central Europe, niany of whom in fact if not in name are Fascist dictatorships, with Germany against Russia.

This conflict between ideologies may quite plausibly be represented as a system of disguised national alliances. Germany had that fear and protested that she was being encircled. France, now, is nervous of the consequence of Fascist development on her southern border, and in central Europe. Intimate and apparently cordial conversations between Signer Mussolini and General Goering do nothing to allay these fears.

Of the outcome of the MussoliniGoering conversations there are contradictory reports. On Saturday the Rome correspondent of the "Daily Mail" reported that it was believed that Italy and Germany had decided against tne dispatch of further volunteers and munitions to Spain, but that if the future showed that France and Russia were continuing to send help to the Government, Italy and Germany would reconsider their decision. It was understood that General Goering and Count Ciano had reaffirmed that it was contrary to |Italo-German interests to permit Bolshevism to take root in Spain. On Monday this report was in part confirmed by Signor Mussolini's interview with the "Volkischer Beobachter" when he stated: "We have no territorial intentions in connection with Spain. The Anglo-Italian agreement begins the pacification of a tense situation." Today, however, doubts are raised by General Goering's statement to the Italian Press. "Germany and Italy are firmly resolved to oppose the establishment of Bolshevism in Spain." Germany and Italy held the same ideals and opinions, and the same system of authority and order, he said. He denied that Italy had attempted to influence Germany to abandon her present policy towards Spain, declaring that the two countries were still pursuing the same policy.

Notwithstanding this denial, it is pro

bable that Germany has been persuaded to abandon active intervention by the knowledge that Italy, with other problems claiming her interest, is not prepared to support her wholeheartedly—unless Russia and France attempt to turn the scale.

This explanation would be in line with acceptance of the British policy. Mr. Eden made it abundantly clear in his speech yesterday, as he has done previously, that Britain desires to tip the scale neither way, nor to see it tipped. She is favouring neither of the rival ideologies and is discouraging, by all means in her power, the ideological war. If Germany and Italy on the one side and Russia on the other will also agree to leave Spain to settle her own problems Britain can remain friendly with all of them. But this impartial attitude will quite naturally bring Britain closer to the neighbouring democracy. France, despite the formation of a Popular Front and its association with the nomenclature of Communism, remains democratic. But Franco-British accord in measures for the salvation of democracy does not imply Britain's abandonment of her policy against alliances, nor that she is preparing to enter the war of ideologies and make it three-sided: Democracy, Fascism, Communism. Mr. Eden's statement makes one fact plain: that every country must be permitted to choose its own system of government, and Britain will neither allow Fascism to be thrust upon herself nor attempt to thru9t democracy on her neighbour.