MOMENTOUS DEBATE

Evening Star, Issue 22273, 26 February 1936, Page 9

MOMENTOUS DEBATE

BRITAIN’S FOREIGN POLICY GOVERNMENT SEEKS CLEAR DECLARATION STRICT ADHERENCE TO LEAGUE PRINCIPLES Press Association—By Telegraph—Copyright LONDON, February 24. Whatever course events may take the one essential element is that Britain must be strong. This was the keynote of Mr Eden’s speech, which dominated the Foreign Affairs debate, for which the House was crowded. Mr Eden sat between Mr Stanley Baldwin and Mr Hamsay MacDonald, and spoke from notes, which he use merely as a guide to fluent thought and for his principal declarations, as when he said the

chances of averting the catastrophe of a recurrence of the world war were slender unless Britain was strong and determined enough to play her part. What the. House wanted to know was the Government’s attitude on oil sanctions, but no light was thrown thereon. Captain Eden said the Government had not completed its examination of the experts’ report./ “ If both sides even now were to accept the good offices of the League, of which they are full members, I am sure there would be no hesitation among their fellow-members in agreeing that the machinery of the Committee of Five was still available,” said the Foreign Secretary. IMPORTANT TOPICS. Referring to suggested reforms of the League Covenant, Mr Eden said this was not the time to undertake its amendment. Referring to the preliminary conversations for negotiating an AngloEgyptian treaty settlement, Mr Eden said that the British Governnient entered upon the conversations with every intention that, as far as its efforts could achieve it, the conversations should succeed.

INTERNATIONAL SITUATION. Passing on to examine the international situation as a whole, Mr Eden said it would be idle to deny that there was widespread anxiety as to the future. “It is anxiety, not minimised, though it is mitigated, by the reflection that the course which this country pursues in the next year or two may well be the decisive factor. This country is firmly attached to a policy of collective security because’ it believes it is the policy most likely to ensure maintenance of peace. If this country is to play its full part in any system of collective security two conditions are indispensable—first, the system should be truly collective and so powerful as to deter any would-be aggressor; and secondly, this country should be strong and determined enough in policy and in arms >to play its full part therein.”

COLLECTIVE SECURITY. Fear of unprovoked aggression, Mr Eden said, could only be eliminated by a gradual strengthening of collective security until every nation was convinced that in no circumstances could aggression be made to pay. It was essential in reaffirming the Government’s attachment to the League and collective security, he proceeded, to distinguish clearly between that policy and encirclement. The Government would take its full share in the former. It would have neither lot nor part in the latter. Its first objective must be a world-wide system of collective, security embracing all nations and with authority unchallenged and unchallengeable, but in a true system the door must always be wide open for the | entry of others. The most pressing immediate task before Britain was to bring back some measures of confidence to Europe, and to succeed other nations must be convinced of our sincerity and our strength. Their confidence could only be gained if Britain ! pursued a constant and constructive I policy. Such policy could, he believed, be devised and followed with consist- ■ ency on the lines he had indicated. LABOUR CRITICISMS. Colonel Wedgwood (Labour) said that if, we failed with Signor Mussolini how could we hope to succeed with Herr Hitler? Mr H. J. Parker (Labour) said we should do our utmost to see that those great dangers to peace. Signor Mussolini and Herr Hitler, were removed from power ns soon as possible. The League must not compromise with Sir Arnold Wilson (Conservative), , amid interruptions from Labourites, de-

scribed the Abyssinian Government as brutal and cruel. Thousands of lives would have been saved if Sir Samuel Hoare’s plan had not been rejected with contumely. Major Attlee (Labour) said there was only one definite statement in Mr Eden’s speech, and that was that the Government had not yet made up its mind on oil sanctions. The real cause of the delay was the reluctance of two leading States to impose oil sanctions because they had been playing with alliances. Viscount Cranborne (Conservative), winding up the debate, said it had been satisfactory from the viewpoint of the Government. It revealed no cleavage on the main lines of foreign policy, with the exception of speeches affecting many of the export trades. British rearmament was necessary not only from

the angle of national defence, but from the viewpoint of the League and foreign policy. Mr J. M'Govern (Left Wing Labour), attacking the opposition Labourites, asked whether they would don a uniform or be conscientious objectors in the event of war breaking out. Ho described Mr Eden as “ a foolscap and typewriter politician.” RECEPTION IN ROME MORE UNCOMPROMISING TONE EXPECTED OIL SANCTIONS A GRAVE ISSUE , LONDON, February 21. Concerning the Maffey report, Mr Eden said that Italy made an inquiry towards the end of January, 1935, but no specific reply was returned to Italy owing to the fact of the Italian activities in Abyssinia raising the whole question of the integrity of Abyssinia. Any personal British interests were then naturally subordinate to our obligations as a member of ,the League. He agreed that the leakage was a matter of grave concern, and he hoped the House would not ask what steps he proposed to take. A distinction must be drawn between a document stolen in London and leakage over a document in Paris, over which they had no control. He expressed the opinion that no useful purpose would be served by publishing the document as a White Paper. RESERVING LIBERTY OF ACTION. The 1 Daily Telegraph’s ’ Rome correspondent says Mr Eden’s speech caused surprise, as it was expected that he would be more uncompromising toward Italy. Official reaction, according to the Government spokesman, is that Italy disagrees that an oil sanction resembles others; on the contrary, oil is a sinew' of war, therefore an oil sanction would be a military sanction. Consequently, Italy reserves complete liberty of action if it is imposed or the present sanctions are intensified. Mr Eden’s hint of a possible resumption of peace discussions rvas received with mixed feelings. Italy would not refuse to consider the proposal, but would demand direct negotiations with Emperor Selassie owung to Marshal Badoglio’s success and in expectation of similar success, and because sanctions were not effective. Mr Eden’s statement about the matter was due to misinformation. Italy regards the refusal to publish the Maffey report as an indication that the passages Dr Gayda did not print were derogatory to Britain.

SENATOR BORAH’S SPEECH. The Koine correspondent of ‘ The l imes ’ says the Italians believe that Britain’s cautious attitude toward sanctions will be increased by Senator Borah's speed), especially the criticism of the motives which induced the League to declare Italy was the aggressor. Political circles emphasise that Senator Borah’s reference to insidious propaganda confirms their allegations that Britain brought pressure to bear on the United States for the purpose of persuading her to join in sanctions. The German Ambassador, Herr Von Hassell, returned from. Berlin and visited Signor Mussolini, whom, it is believed, he informed of the German attitude to the Franco-llussian pact. The impression persists that although Italy and Germany have not yet concluded an agreement, Italy, while sanctions are imposed, would not join Anglo-French action if Germany violated her undertaking regarding the demilitarised Rhineland. “ WAR MUST CONTINUE.” A message from Rome states that Mr Eden’s hint of a possible resumption of the peace discussions on the basis of tlie Committee of Five’s proposals is strongly rejected. Typical comment is that “ Italy has travelled far since she marched into Adowa, but Mr Eden still stands by the plan drawn up in .September. Italy will never evacuate tlie territory she has gained in the Abyssinian conflict, therefore flic war must continue.”

LAST STAGE OF DEBATE NO CLEAVAGE ON MAIN LINES (Britith Official Wireless.) KUGBY, February 25. (Received February 26, at 1 p.m.) Winding up the debate in the House of Commons, Viscount Cranborne said that it had revealed no cleavage on the main lines of British policy. Referring to sanctions, he said that the essential task of the League on this occasion was to establish, not that sanctions must be applied, but that they could—and would—-be applied if necessary. Dealing with the report of the Committee of Five, . Viscount Cranborne said that the Government's view was that it might form a basis of negotiations, and he pointed out that it had been put forward before the outbreak of the war, not to placate Italy, but as a just basis for settlement. WARNINGS FROM ITALY LONDON, February 24. The ‘ Daily Mail’s ’ Paris correspondent says Signor Cerutti visited M. Flandin and, according to diplomatic circles, warned him that considerable danger would attend the application of oil sanctions. He also pointed out that Signor, Grandi had similarly warned Mr Eden, adding that Italy would not consent to the safety of her armies being jeopardised by Geneva.