NEW GUINEA

Evening Post, Volume CXXVI, Issue 98, 22 October 1938, Page 8

NEW GUINEA

AUSTRALIA'S MANDATE

NO RELINQUISHMENT

CHESS BOARD FEARS

(From "The Post's" Representative.)

SYDNEY, October 14,

The Anglo-French policy of appeasement of Germany's demands in Europe has raised fears in Australia whether the same policy will be framed to meet Herr Hitler's colonial thrust, which, realists here believe", will surely follow. Although Africa may be the first target of German ambitions, a considerable body of Australian! opinion believes that the lure of the rich goldfields in Mandated New Guinea may impel Germany to make this former colony of hers the first step in her parade for restorations. Australia's future role in the likely chessboard moves of the Pacific has been much discussed in this country during the last few months, and opinion has crystallised into determination to thwart any Germanic move to control again the rich territory won byAustralia in 1914 by her first expeditionary military and naval force.

Mr. W. M. Hughes, Prime Minister when Australia was given the New Guinea mandate in 1919 and now Minister of External Affairs, said recently that the Mandates Commission of the League of Nations had handed portion of New Guinea to Australia as a sacred trust, and any talk of surrendering that trust could only be described as cowardly and unjust.

"The New Guinea question," stated Mr. Hughes, "is not so much a terri-' torial one 'as a human one. Australia, as an advanced nation;* was given the mandate by the' highest tribunal —the League of Nations —to help and protect and advance the interests generally of a backward people. There is no question of relinquishing our mandate. When the mandate was given there was no mention of, any restriction 6n the term of our tenure. Unless or until the peoples of; New Guinea cease to be backward and are in,a position to protect themselves, Australia has a sacred duty as a guardian. We would be guilty of a gross dereliction in our duty* if we handed the mandated area over to another nation. Any suggestion that Australia should hand it over to another nation must not even be considered. CHILD OF ADOPTION, "If a man adopts a child, society expects him to feed, clothe, and educate that child," Mr. Hughes added. "Until that child reaches manhood, his obligations continue. That, precisely, is the position of the Mandated Territory in relation to Australia. It will be many generations, I think, before the territory reaches manhood and is able to protect itself." An English point of view was put by Mr. Harry V. Hodson, editor of the "Round Table" and official recorder at the recent British Commonwealth Conference here. He said that, arising out of the European crisis, Great Britain and the Dominions had a strong moral obligation to face in relation to the German colonial question. The problem involved the. rights and interests of millions of natives. The Empire had no right to buy peace at their expense. He believed that there were other paths to be explored besides those of handing back to Germany her former colonies, .or of plainly refusing to do so. Those paths might be extremely difficult to find and to follow. The colonial problem vitally affected Australia, which had a mandate over a territory which was valuable from a strategic point of view. The probable use of New Guinea as a centre for operations against not only Australia but also the Singapore base would be one of the chief reasons animating policy against return of the territory to Germany. The alignment of the latter country with Japan is a threatening factor. ONE'S NEXT-DOOR NEIGHBOUR. On this point, the "Sydney Morning Herald," in an editorial article, said: — "If there is any risk of the Commonwealth's being quietly subjected to, pressure to yield up the mandate, as part of the process of appeasement, it behoves Australians to consider in advance, not merely whether they are prepared to surrender a territory in which large sums of money are being expended, but whether they want Nazi Germany—especially as an ally of a militant Japan—as a next-door neighbour. That is the crux of the question. It may be argued that we do not need any more landed possessions. We have as much territory as we can develop with our present resources. But can we afford to have an aggressive foreign frontier marching with that of Papua, a base within easy striking distance of the Australian mainland? Our defence problems, already grave, would then be immensely complicated. If there is need for the Australian public to do some hard thinking on this subject, it is even more necessary for the Federal Government to survey th,e mandate question in all its aspects and formulate at least a provisional policy in readiness for future developments." .

Emphasising the significance of Japan's withdrawal of her representatives from the Mandates Commission, the "Herald" states: —"Whatever Germany's attitude towards New Guinea may be, she must long ago have abandoned hope of regaining the Mariana, Caroline, and Marshall Islands from Japan. Tokio intends to return these mandated territories neither to Germany nor the League. Japan's apparent repudiation, of the last remnants of the League's authority over the islands renders her occupation of them indistinguishable from ownership, and it will be remarkable if she does not deal with them accordingly. Australia holds New Guinea in trust from the League, and claims no more than the absolute right to the retention of the mandate —a retention vital to her security—so long as she faithfully discharges the duties of her trusteeship. Obviously, however, a new situation would arise if Japan were formally to annex and fortify the islands north of the Equator."