WORK OF CONFERENCE

Evening Post, Volume CXL, Issue 21, 25 July 1945, Page 7

WORK OF CONFERENCE

LONDON PRESS COMMENT

Rec. 9.40 a.m. LONDON, July 24. The return.of Messrs. Churchill, Attlee, and Eden to London from Potsdam does not mean that the conference has completed its work, it is stated here. If Mr. Churchill and his National Government continue %in power it is expected that the Prime Minister will return without much delay, but if he is defeated or a stalemate results it is thought possible that the Potsdam meeting may be adjourned for a time. The black-out on news from Potsdam has caused some irritation among the British public, not so much, perhaps, at the total censorship, although this is viewed in several quarters with suspicion, but because of the trivial items of news released. These have included 'the number of alarm clocks, sheets, and lawn mowers sent to Potsdam, and the fact that the film actor Mickey Rooney had given a concert. Although there has been much speculation on the scope of the subjects discussed and the extent of agreement reached, there has been no official confirmation. These speculations suggest that the position of Germany has ! ranked first, and "The Times" diplomatic correspondent thinks that the assurance that the conference has "gone ahead" means that a, new agreement has been forged on most of the German problems, including the need for giving greater powers to the Central Allied Control Commission in Berlin and equipping it to ensure uniform practice and supervision in all zones. Other questions of importance discussed are believed to be have been what Germany shall consist of now and whether Germany shall develop politically. It is also thought that Far Eastern issues have been discussed, gathering impetus from the recent Russo-Chinese conversations and the fact that many United. States experts on the Far East have been rushed to the conference. WIDEK ISSUES. It is thought that the position in Europe as a whole is on the agenda, with the special problems of the Balkans, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Turkey, and Spain. Russia, it is said, is especially keen to see the Fascist regime in Spain eliminated. The position of Austria also requires clarification, for neither Britain nor America has recognised the "Renner" Government which was established in Vienna with the tacit permission of the Soviet without prior consultation with Washington and London. The British role at Potsdam naturally has been the subject of much interest. The "Economist," discussing it, declares that at first sight it would seem that no Power is so well equipped as Great Britain to fulfil the role of intermediary between Russia and America, which stand for two basically opposed conceptions of society—the completely planned and the completely unplanned, a fundamental difference that will inevitably colour their policies for Europe and which already are producing in western Europe a sort of political schizophrenia. But, the article says, it seems at present almost impossible to assign any longterm purpose to British, diplomatic activities. It suggests that Britain is apprehensive of the reaction in Washington, while in America Britain is increasingly being regarded as a tired, old, defensive Power, reactionary and intransigent, frightened of Russia. Mr. Churchill's Government, it says, has clearly attempted to act as an intermediary or go-between in Europe, but it has been content to modify the American or Russian proposals without providing alternatives and has mediated itself out of the possibility of mediating. The article charges Mr. Churchill with being largely responsible for a policy of deference towards America which has greatly hindered any effort to evolve a separate approach. , The "Economist" also declares that what is now necessary is a ruthlessly honest assessment of Britain's position—its strength and weakness—and on that basis the development of a positive policy defining spheres and methods of co-operation* within the Commonwealth, with western Europe and with other great Powers. It adds: "Yes, there is no sign that such a balance-sheet has been struck or such fundamental thinking done," and it declares: "In the next few years Britain will either realise or lose the opportunity of filling the creative role of mediator in world affairs and of a closer partner in Europe. On the next Government will fall the inescapable choice of opting for energy, and a policy of leadership and influence or for appeasement confusion and steady decline." TEST OF THE CONFERENCE. The "New Statesman and Nation" says: "The test of Potsdam will be its ability to settle a question that cannot be shelved —the economic and political future of Europe, dependent on immediate determinations affecting Germany. The American policy is to favour the restoration of a sort of Weimar Germany, with the political influence of the Catholic centre coagulating a revived capitalist economy. Stalin's prime essential is to secure the maximum of reparations in kind. There are also clear signs that the Russians know that only by State planning is there any hope of rebuilding society in war-devastated countries, and that for successful State control there must be autonomous Governments supported by real political parties T.heirs is not the American conception of democratic freedom. "The moral strength of Mr. Churchill's position is that he can speak, if he will, not only for England but for Europe as a whole. If he elects to manoeuvre and back President Truman's general line of Wilsonian liberalism in the hope of securing American financial aid and American support for British intervention on behalf of discredited persons and parties in eastern Europe, he will court disaster. The last hopes of genuine three-Power collaboration will vanish, and with them every chance of restoring economic health and social decency for this generation of Europeans."