ANGLO-AMERICAN RELATIONS

Greymouth Evening Star, 26 January 1929, Page 10

ANGLO-AMERICAN RELATIONS

DESIRE FOR PEACE.

There is no question to-day that is more important than the necessity for perfecting legislative mechanism which can be used for the preventon of war. It has been freely said—and we are continually informed by statesmen of every party—that if we do not wake up and take constructive steps it is only a matter of time before the world will once again be engulfed in a war which will mean the extinction of our civilisation (writes Sir J. Power, M.P., in the London “Sunday Times”). Nine years have passed since the Treaty of Versailles was concluded, bristling with questions that will have to be settled by war if we fail to find a means of settling them without violence. .Germany cannot be expected to remain indefinitely in her present helpless position, waiting and hoping for tht universal disarmament set forth in the Treaty, while tho other nations fail to cary out their part of the agreement. It is, I believe, the legal view that Germany is bound to carry out her part of the Treaty regardless of the obligatinons of the Allies. This may be •so from a legal point of view, blit it cannot be defended from a moral, spiritual, or commonsense standpoint. On. the other hand, no nation can be expected to destroy the weapons of selfdefence until these are replaced by definite agreements between the Great Powers that they will not resort to war for the settlement of international disputes but will compose their differences by aribtration instead of violence.

In every country in Europe, and throughout the British Commonwealth of Nations, the spiritual longing to escape from the inhuman and brutal consequences of war is widespread. We have learnt our lesson, and, quite apart from al] our best and noblest aspirations for peace and goodwill with onr fellow men, we know that there exists to-day no question, of sufficient importance to justify the clash of unis. Moreover, dur experience has actually taught us that war never achieves its end, and that the victor finds his success Dead Sea fruit. With one notable exception, the world war left, both victors and the vanquished broken, financially and physically. It is this one exception that stands in the way of complete agreement as to the prevention of war.

It is unfortunate for the rest of the world that the United States of America should find herself in such a •■ondition of overwhelming prosperity, with tiie greater part of Europe’s ormer wealth safely housed in her strongrooms. We are told time ami time again that we cannot formulate any scheme of international law unless we get the support of the United States of America. This, unfortunately. would appear to be true. But 1 •annot see any prospect of our ever Driving at an agreement with Aemrica on this subject so long as we mislead the Americans as to our tine feelings on the matter, and lead tliem to suppose that we hold them in that exaggerated respect and esteem which they might gather was the case from the utterances of' our statesmen, and from articles in the Press. Nine times out of ten it is sheer hypocrisy, and does not represent the truth.

STR AI NED RELATIONS. The true friendship and esteem with one of the greatest nations of the world is a thing to be desired, I freely admit, but to affirm that it exists to-day is a perversion of the truth. I have enough respect for the intelligence of the American people to believe that this is a the wrong wav to approach them. They

c.<in respect, and do respect, anyone who tells them the truth, even if the points of view differ, but they have no respect or use for those who truckle mid cringe to them and drench them with flattery. Americans know that that kind of thing is hypocritical and insi nee re. No one would deny for one moment that we have large numbers of American friends in the truest sense of the word, who desire to see things altered and the United States take her share of the troubles of the world, who are censorious and in disagreement with the policy of their country. The people of the United States pride. themselves upon their great sense of justice, their high idealism, and claim that Liberty is their special prerogative. Therefore '.here can be no harm in drawing their attention to the facts as we see them. It cannot be gainsaid that before the war the U-S.A. was heavily in debt to

Europe ; she was a debtor nation and held large sums of British capital, by means of which she developed her industries. To-day, the boot is on the other leg, and it is Europe that is heavily in debt to the United States of America. The U.S.A, was for some years successful in keeping out of the war —a war undertaken to uphold the

ideals for which the United States of America stands and to prevent a military /autocracy obtaining complete control in Europe, with the consequent stifling of Liberty. No American can deny that this was the case, and, indeed, when the U.S.A, came into the War it was proclaimed far and wide by American statesmen that Germany’s object was to destroy Liberty wherever it existed. Therefore we are justified in saying that for nearly three years the Allies fought the United States’ battles without her taking either a physical or financial share in the struggle. In the meantime the wealth of Europe flowed in ever-increasing volume to the United States, and the position in Europe reached the stage when the United States of America had to face the probability of the triumph of military tyranny, which meant the extinction of Liberty and the consequent loss of the huge sums of money owed by the Allies for the purchase of supplies of food and munitions of war.

SHARE THE BURDEN. Her advent into the war was hailed with joy by the Allies, but ,alas for human hopes! more than a year elapsed before she made her appearance on the battlefield. You cannot make money and make war at the same time, and America Iyad neglected to fit herself to take a full share in the conflict, and was helpless from a combatant point of view when she made her great Declaration of (War. Therefore, although the United States of America immediately abandoned all her activities as a neutral in supplying the. enemy, nevertheless the armies of°Europe and the British Empire had to hold the fort and sacrifice the flower of their manhood for more than twelve months until the American Army arrived in France.

In the meantime she feverishly supplied us with arms and munitions, which were booked up to the Allies at the prevailing price, this being a “com-

mercial” transaction; and the guns and munitions were duly blown into the air, worn out, or captured. But men s lives are not articles of commerce, and the men who used these guns and munitions and perished by their hundreds of thousands in the endeavour to make the world “safe for democracy” did not wipe out the debt for the weapons they used, and unborn generations in . Europe will have to take their share in paying to the United States of America the debts incurred in this “commercial” transaction.

Ameriea sacrificed much of her wealth in the war, but is she alone in this? Did we not expend almost our last penny and put our last respective man in the field? But it is futile to compare respective losses, which are so well known to the world. Europe, however, has the right to demand that the United States of America should shoulder her share of the burden and the risks involved in maintaining peace in that world in which she enjoys such astounding prosperity. Great wealth brings great responsibilities to the individual. Does this not also apply to nations ? The war ruined Europe- It left the United States rich beyond her wildest dreams —a creditor instead of a debtor nation. Would it not be good business, therefore, for the United States to join with the other nations of the world in bringing about a condition of permanent peace in which her debtor nations could better work and toil in order to pay the debts they owe her?