FRANCO-GERMAN DISSENSION

Greymouth Evening Star, 22 March 1935, Page 7

FRANCO-GERMAN DISSENSION

M. FLANDIN’S WARNING

“A POWERFUL BLOCK”

[by CABLE —PRESS ASSN. —COPYRIGHT.]

LONDON, March 21.

M. Flandin’s speech in the Senate is regarded as historic. It certainly was characterised by fearless frankness. He traversed Herr Hitler’s declaration, point by point. He said that a Franco-German reconciliation could not be based on a travesty of truth and a negation of law and justice. It was untrue, that the German people laid down their arms after a war which they had not wanted. The world’s judgment as regards the responsibility for unchaining the war had been given long ago, while if the German people laid down arms, it- was because the coalition nations, fighting for the right,, were victorious, as they would also be victorious in the future.

These passages were received with loud cheers.

Declaring that it was untrue that Germany had fulfilled her obligations under the Peace Treaty, M. Flandin declared that modifications of. treaties were possible, but only within a framework of legality. “France hates war,” he continued. “Ail measures for the maintenance of peace, will be taken. The Government will not cease in its efforts to group round itself a powerful block of the States which have preserved the same ideals as ourselves! Let us re-temper and re-create our national •soul! Let us re-establish our unity! Do not doubt France has,near her a whole train of nations who will join her in the hour of danger!”

FRANCO-ITALIAN NOTES.

(Received March 22, 10.30 a.m.) PARIS, March 21.

The note to Germany says that Germany after accepting an invitation to discuss Franco-British proposals, deliberately* compromised the possibility of successful negotiation. France places on Germany the responsibility for the world unrest and the possible consequences thereof. The re-establishment of conscription and the official constitution of military aviation are definitely contrary to the treaties Germany has signed, and also contrary to the declaration of 11/12/32, when the German Government spontaneously recognised that a general armaments statute, involving equality rights for Germany, could not be realised without the establishment of a regime of general security. The Franco-British Governments, after several proposals tending to implement this principle, believed it could testify confidence in Germany by proposing free negotiations for re-establishment of German armaments in the staute of a general settlement of the problem of security and armaments. ’ Germany seemed to justify confidence by accepting the principle thereof, but the announcement of conscription constitutes a new manifestation of dispositions and methods ‘with which Germany intends to oppose the offer of conciliation. Accordingly, France is obliged to take note of the facts that Germany has deliberately disagreed with the essential principle of the law of nations, that no Power can evade or modify a treaty without the friendly assent of the contracting parties, and has also taken steps most calculated to compromise the success of the negotiations. France is firmly resolved not to allow unilateral decisions violating international understandings being taken into account in any negotiation, although she . will seek all proper means of international collaboration for dissipating unrest, and safeguarding European peace.

ROME, March 21.

The Italian note strongly protests against the German revocation of the Versailles Treaty. It adds: The Government maintains the utmost reserve regarding Germany’s decision and probable developments thereof. ' Italy has always considered that the Versailles Treaty, part live, should be revised by negotiation, and has also maintained that Germany’s armaments should be the subject of negotiation, for which Germany accepted the principle on February 14. Moreover, Italy has always sought to persuade Germany to collaborate with the principal Powers, enabling recognition of Germany’s rights and responsibilities. Consequently, Germany’s decision is particularly grave, owing to the uncertainty aroused. Italy cannot accept as a fait accompli any unilateral decision annulling international obligations.

GERMAN REJECTION.

BERLIN, March 21

Baron Von Neurath notified the French Ambassador that Germany rejected the explanationo accompanying the French note, because “it did not take into account the actual position." Von Neurath similarly rejected the explanation with the Italian note.

LEAGUE COUNCIL

GENEVA. March 21

Tho French note to the League requests a Council meeting to discuss Germany’s conscription anti Air Force, decisions, which deliberately repudiate Germany’s treaty obligations. It points out that Germany remains a member until October 21. whjn the two years’ notice of withdrawal expires. The meeting y’ll probably be convened early in April.

GERMANY AND LEAGUE

LONDON, March 21

In reference to Germany’s reported desire, to resume a place in the League of Nations, the "Dally Telegraph’s" diplomatic correspondent says: The idea that a country can withdraw from the League, violate its ♦obligations, and then resume its place as though nothing had happened, is nowhere held admissible. Herr Hitler will certainly be advised that, if -Germany sincerely desires to cooperate in the work of the League, •he should first show a willingness to negotiate a gener d settlement on J the basis of the London Declaration. ; "The Times” says: "It is agreed ■ that the general object of European • policy is to bring Germany back to tho League, but nothing could be bet’ter calculated to prevent her return than to indict her before the League Council. Moreover the Council can no more than declare, what every-

I body knows, that Germany has violated the Treaty of Versailles. The real question is whether Germany, in the last fifteen years, had a square deal, and whether the Treaty itself was in all respects a fair one. That question cannot be answered by any arbitration court in the world. The only result of arraigning Germany must, be to give the League in German eyes, an appearance more than ever of an anti-German association and render more difficult an eventful approach thereto by Herr Hitler.”

DEBATE IN COMMONS.

SIR J. SIMON’S STATEMENT

[BRITISH OFFICIAL WIRELESS.]

RUGBY, March 21.

The forthcoming Ministerial conversations in Berlin and elsewhere, were the subject of a brief and restrained debate in the Commons.

Mr Lansbury (Labour)* in opening, said that the events in Germany during the week-end caused shock, and a feeling akin to despair, and almost comparable with what happened in 1914. The Nations of Europe should be made to understand that the British Government's policy was one of peace, based, not on rearmament, but on disarmament. Sir Herbert Samuel (Liberal) said that, in describing the effect on the minds of the British people of the German declaration, Mu Lansbury had, in no degree, used language of exaggeration. Sir John Simon said that he hoped to have a frank discussion with the German Chancellor, for the visit called for a complete frankness and a discussion of a sort that could not be preceded by a public rehearsal. The series of visits would be exploratory in character. He recalled the terms of the London Declaration s of February 3, the tone of which was recognised by Germany as fair and friendly, and following which an invitation was extended for the present visit. He had thought it necessary to make it entirely clear that the scope and purpose of the visit should not be limited to some particular item raised in the London Communique, but that the meeting should have before it the full width of its subject matter. There were to be four points of discussion, namely; exchanges of views on security, on armaments, on the return of Germany to the League, and on the proposed air pact. It was only when an assurance was forthcoming on the German side that the discussions should be as wide as that, that we communicated with the other Governments. Not only were these four topics thus marked down, but it was the basis of the proposed visit, that they should be discussed with a view to ultimately reaching a solution by agreement. It, ,Avas in those circumstances that ev efits occurred at the end of last week which Mr Lansbury referred to in such grave and appropriate terms. It had inevitably provoked protests from the British, French, and Italian. , Governments. The

GRAVE QUESTION AROSE

as to the proper course to take. It was obvious that unilateral action inevitably raised the question as to the value of agreements, and that was bad preparation for a future agreement, but he suggested that . the course the Government had tried to take with reference, to this most grave event was the wiser one. • To refuse to cancel the engagement would lead nowhere. They, therefoie, demanded an assurance that the scope of the conversations should be in no way restricted. The present state of suspicion and unrest in Europe could not be allayed without security bv negotiation and agieement on all the four matters mentioned, and in those circumstances, having made that reservation and protest, the Government had taken the view that it was necessary and right to continue this business. He had offered no observation on the date of the German announcement, but its nature and contents, whicn thiew such a disturbing effect on the prospect, of settlement by agreement, demanded notice. .... , Sir J. Simon, continuing, said tnat the figure indicated by its declaration of German effectives was so large and so considerable an advance over the figures suggested less than a year ago, and indeed exceeded what any Power in Western Europe at the present time could match,, tnat. it raised grave doubts as to whether, if such figures were persisted m, an agreement with some of Germany s neighbours would be possible He would go to Berlin determined to do. everything Britain could to promote peace and secure it. The object of the British policy throughout had been to help to bring this great State back into the Councils of and the community of Europe, on terms just to her and fair and secure for all. so that she. with her great ta ent am resources, might contribute, rvith full sense of equal status ami dignity, to the task which every good European, who wants peace, has got to share.

LABOUR LEADER’S APPEAL.

(Reed. March 22, 1.30 p.m.) LONDON, March 21. Mr Lansbury, in the debate in the Commons, said that Germany had flung down’ a new challenge to the world, demanding not only equal rights and privileges with other nations, but the right to tear up the Versailles Treaty and embark on a policy of armaments, which was bound to lead to an armaments race, and ultimately to plunge us into war and destroy civilisation. The Government, the House, and everyone must recognise the imperative duty of making the greate.at effort to save civilisation. (Cheers). Sir John Simon should go to Berlin with a new man“I want our country to take the lead fn telling the world that the British Empire is willing to lay on the altar of disarmament the whole business of aerial warfare, that, along with other nations, we are willing to abandon it everywhere, in all circumstances, for good,” he said. It we do that, other things will fall into their proper proportions. Labour is convinced that aerial warfare threatens the whole future of mankind. If this offer is not accepted, we should, at any rate, have shown the world that we are in real earnest. Me want Sir John Simon, at Berlin, to sav that when we agreed to the rearming of Germany, we did not agree to re-arming in the fashion she is I new proposing. (Cheeis). Labour is I convinced that the British and other I Governments committed a great ; blunder is nut reassembling another ; World Economic Conference. Until intei national economic relations are ptG on a different footing, there cannot be peace and security. (Cheers,. If the world mobilised raw materials and organised markets, it would be

infinitely better than all the fiddling with quotas and restrictions. There is room for materials, and there are markets enough in the world for everyone, if properly organised. In 1914-18 a big price was paid on the cry that war was the only way- to cast out militarism, hut war cannot cast out war. I appeal to the House not to allow the months to slip away until we are plunged into another war. The only way to root out war is to make peaceful arrangements, not for the benefit just, of our nation, but the whole world.

MR. EDEN’S VISIT.

RUGBY, March 21.

Mr. Eden will be accompanied on his journey to Russia, by the Soviet Ambassador in London, M. Maisky, the Parliamentary Private Secertary, Lord Cranbourne, and officials of the Foreign Office, including Mr. Strang, who until recently, was Counsellor and Charge D’Affairs, at the British Embassy in Moscow. Mr. Eden will have conversations with the Russian leader. M. Stalin, but it is expected that his main discussions will be with the Soviet Foreign Minister, M. Litvinoff, on questions arising out of the political situation in Europe. Mr. Eden will stay at the British Embassy, and the Russian authorities are arranging a programme of festivities in his honour, which will include an official dinner given by 'M. Litvinoff,# and a gala performance by the Moscow Ballet.

The party will leave Moscow on March 31, and will arrive at Warsaw on the evening of April 1, where Mr. Eden will be welcomed by the Polish Ambassador at London, who is proceeding there specially for the occasion.

U.S.A. POLICY

WASHINGTON, March 20

, In a press interview, to-day, President Roosevelt declined to give direct answers as to what would be the U.S.A, action regarding the European arms situation. The President indicated however, that* America will maintain a “hands-off” policy, if possibly.

He took occasion to re-affirm the hope that some success would result from the Geneva . arms conference, and that America would continue her “good neighbour” policy in foreign affairs.

No report regarding the European armament situation has yet been received by the State Department from the American Embassy at London; but it is understood that Sir. J. Simon merely supplied information for the consideration of the American Government.

AUSTRIAN CONSCRIPTION.

VIENNA, March 21.

Prince Starhemberg t in a speech to the Deputy leaders, officially recognised the “Sport and Drill Front” and unequivocally hinted that conscription is impending. He declared: It is. your duty to make the country’s youth capable of bearing arms. The . order for conscription which will be introduced within a measurable time, may be a mere formality.

RAID REHEARSAL SUCCESS.

(Received March 22. 11.30 a.m.) LONDON, March 21.

The “Daily Mail” says: The Berlin air raid rehearsal was the most elaborate ever carried out, 50,000 residents participating in deadly earnest. Sirens blared simultaneously on the appearance of air raiders. Traffic stopped and everyone rushed to the underground shelters, deserting trams and buses. Maroons were exploded representing bombs of every kind. The rescue service engaged included police, fire ambulance, anti-poison-gas, wfiter and gas main repair squads, and housebreaking gangs rescuing victims trapped in the ruins of houses and schools. “Bomb craters” appeared in the streets, from which flames and water spurted from the burst pipes. Asbestos-c Tad masked squads rushed to extinguish the gas fires, others working knee-deep in the water repairing mains. Scores of “wounded" were carried from the streets, “ghastly v.ounds” on bare limbs increasing the realism. Steel-helmeted children raced to the fire stations to report that their homes were ablaze. Foreign Air Attaches were specially impressed with the people’s magnificent discipline. and the vast amount of anti-air-raid equipment available, contrasting with the smaller supplies in lother capitals. Hollywood could not have excelled the dramatic perfection in a picture air raid which Kreuzberg presented. It was impossible to imagine a corresponding area in London being similarly isolated for 31 hours.

FRENCH AIR FORCE.

(Received March 22, 1 p.m.) PARIS, March 21

M. Denain, ’explaining the Government’s Bill to provide a further £22,000,000 for the Air Force, said that, it was aimed at bringing up the total strength to the desired level as early as possible in 1936. It would enable tho number of planes to be raised from 1100 to 1500. Special attention would be paid to heavy bombing ’planes. Germany’s air development made it clear that France could not wait longer before increasing her air force.

GERMAN TORPEDO RESEARCH

LONDON, March 21

The “Daily Telegraph's" naval correspondent says: German experts have greatly improved the torpedo, by propelling it bv electricity instead of b> compressed ' air. This change has eliminated the track of air bubbles which makes compressed air torpedoes visible to the enemy. The electric torpedo is slower than the latest compressed air torpedo, but it can exceed a speed of 30 miles an hour, which makes it very dangerous to slow-mov-ing merchantmen. German naval men have also devised a method of invisible firing of the torpedo by the hiding of the rush of air from the torpedo tube. * Hitherto there was an upheaval on the surface which betrayed the firing of a torpedo.