The Evening Star WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 1937. JANGLING NATIONS.

Evening Star, Issue 22796, 3 November 1937, Page 10

The Evening Star WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 1937. JANGLING NATIONS.

“ Nobody agrees with anybody ” is a verdict that has been expressed on the present dangerously jangling world. Mr Eden, answering in the Address-iu-Reply debate Labour and Liberal critics and, on the point of German colonies, the dictating voice of Signor Mussolini, has justified his policy, but it would be much to hope that he has done anything to increase agreement. “ The absurd clauses of the peace treaties must be revised,” said Herr Hitler s ally. “ Great peoples like the Germans must be given their right place in the world.” To this Mr Eden has replied “ Let Italy begin.” It was nothing that 'after that he laid down, as has been done repeatedly, that Great Britain stands before all things for 1 peace and defended his non-intervention policy towards Spain against the imputation of favouring either Loyalists or insurgents. The speech, we are to4d. has created a “ painful impression ” in Rome. Germany resents “ bad excuses.” Herr Hitler is said to threaten—but this is apart from the speech—to tear up more clauses of the Versailles Treaty, those dealing with colonies. Only America welcomes the assurance that British policy on another issue—that of the Far East—will be to work in full accord with the United States, whose policy will most certainly not be adventurous. Dictators may bluster; that is their privilege. They are apt to resent plain words in reply. It was no more than the truth which Mr Eden ’ recalled in saying that while Germany was a loser, Italy was a territorial gainer by the •Peace Treaties. Through her own remissness at the Peace Conference she received considerably less than she had hoped for, but she was given complete control over 250,000 German-speaking people in the Tyrol and since then she has added vastly to her territories in Africa by methods which the world has not approved. If she is concerned for “ have-not ” Germany, the remedy lies with her as much as with others. She was a party to the treaty which put former German colonies under mandates, To remind Italy of those things, however, will not conduce to a settlement of the colonies question. It will be long before it is settled as Germany desires. Her minimum demands have been defined as the return of Togoland, the Cameroons, Ruanda and Urundi, . and the creation of a vast African internationalised territory to be jointly “ exploited ” by England, France, , Germany, and Italy. Ruanda and Urundi, formerly part of German East Africa, are now administered under a Belgian mandate. It is plain that there is only one way by which these claims, directly involving three Powers at least in addition to Germany and involving the League as a whole, can be naturally discussed. Let Germany return to the League, let the, matter be argued there in the most amicable manner, and something, short of her demands when a “ vast ” territory for internationalisation is suggested, but still worth the deliberations, may be achieved. But that is what Germany will not do It is a strait path which the Foreign Minister of , any peace-loving country has to walk. Professor Ferrero, the Italian historian, has no love for dictators. His own country lias been no home for him since Fascism prevailed. ’ let he writes in the ‘ Spectator ’ that for more than a year Italy “ has been living in terror of Britain’s immense armaments. It is a universal terror, extending from the King and Mussolini to the mass of the populace, though among the latter the fear is associated with a certain satisfaction and hope of liberation.” To the British mind, that is incredible. It marvels at the propaganda of Fascism, by which such an impression could be produced. And Professor Ferrero goes on to argue that the effect of British rearmament (after ail the slights and impotence that were the fruits of disarmament), has actually increased the dangers of war so far. “To proclaim to the four corners of the compass, as Britain has been doing for the last year, ‘ for the moment I shall do nothing because I am not ready, but only wait, and you will see what I am capable of doing in two months when I am armed ’ —to state the purpose of peace thus before the world is to tell every ill-intentioned State to hurry up and take advantage of the moment. That is precisely what Italy and Japan have done.” One might imagine that Britain’s peace talk—or rearmament talk—had been a series of threats. It has never been that, • even against aggressors. To be disarmed is to be helpless in the world. And if a Foreign Minister said nothing while his country rearmed it would be accused of every sort of malicious design. He can only make his peaceful objectives as plain as possible, and avoid words, generally speaking, that could cause exasperation to anyone, but he will add again to the dangers of war if he is too meek. On the whole, in his latest speech as elsewhere, Mr Eden seems to have trodden this narrow line as. well as it could be trodden.