CAN GERMANY WIN THE

Evening Post, Volume CXXXIX, Issue 136, 11 June 1945, Page 4

CAN GERMANY WIN THE

PEACE?

World War I resulted in the victor Allies (Russia was not among them) imposing reparations payments on Germany. Critics of the reparations policy raised the point that Germany could not be allowed to pay reparations in goods, because payment in German goods would upset British and American industries producing competing goods; and, further, that German payment of reparations in dollar or pound value would need a preliminary financing of German industries by American and/or British loans —from which transaction Germany might emerge a financial victor. Before the thirties of this century had run their course, it was widely conceded that the criticism was just; in other words, that Allied lending to Germany for the purpose of helping Germany to pay reparations to the Allies had failed from a reparation point of view, and was even helping to re-arm a truculent Germany— Hitler's Germany. In due course, World War II arrived, and, now that Germany is again defeated, Britain and America are as determined to prevent Germany from subjecting them to a second reparations swindle as they are determined —by invasion and occupation—to demolish the German pretence (cleverly used by Hitler) that in 1914-18 the German army was never defeated.

Today the Allies have proved, militarily, the fact of Germany's

I defeat. Whether they have found, or will find, the best method of preventing Germany from waging a Third World War is something that still remains to be proved. The most confident note on the financial-industrial question comes from a new figure on the scene, Mr. Edwin Pauley, who is described as President Truman's personal representative on the Reparations Commission. If all the American and British' soldiers were actuated by the spirit of Mr. Pauley, it is probable that the order against fraternisation with German children and adults would be somewhat easier to enforce than it is. Without any attempt to wrap up his policy in cotton wool or in emollient phrases, Mr. Pauley says that America proposes to de-industrialise Germany to the extent required to make German war impossible. "The United States, after the last war, sent food and advanced credit to Germany," he said; "we will not this time." If the policy following the last war were repeated, then Germany's industrial development would have to be encouraged by the Allies; but under the present American policy, '"Germany would be stripped of her industries to destroy her future war potential, and that was one of the principal functions of the reparations programme. Any German war industries which were not removable should be destroyed." That is the most clear-cut statement yet heard from any high Allied quarter. But do the other three occupying Allies (Russia, *f ritain, and France) subscribe to it? On this vital point Mr. Pauley is equally definite. He said that the American delegation on reparations i was "virtually in the dark concerning the desires of Britain and Russia," but "with a definite programme in mind," the Americans will go to Moscow at an early date with co-ordinating intent.

Germany's hope of winning the peace rests very largely on the possibility of disagreement among the four occupying Powers on the treatment of Germans and of Germany during the next twelve months. Will all four accept and enforce a clear-cut programme like Mr. Pauley's concerning industrialisation? Will their principles and actions equally coincide in the matter of fraternisation with the German people; the degree of autonomy or self-rule granted to German industries, local government, trade unions, and domestic administrations; the conditions governing German newspapers, radio, books, etc.? Tutelage of seventy millions of conquered people would be a problem for one occupying Power; a quadruple problem for four. Marshal Zhukov's words were firm— '•'fraternisation forbidden," etc.—but time will tell. Still more candid is Field-Marshal Montgomery's message to the German people that nonfraternisation is notice to them that they, and not merely their Governments, have been guilty of two World Wars, have sustained two defeats (this one fully demonstrated), and must not be "fooled again" into a third war. The Allies, Montgomery says, must "destroy the evil of National Socialism; it is too early yet to be certain that we have done that."