ROOSEVELT-CHURCHILL

Greymouth Evening Star, 11 September 1944, Page 6

ROOSEVELT-CHURCHILL

MEETING AT QUEBEC TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION NEW YORK, September 9. Great preparations are being made in Quebec for another meeting of Mr. Churchill and President Roosevelt. The 800 rooms of the Chateau Frontenac have been reserved for British' and American delegates. There is talk that an armistice may come in time to permit Messrs Churchill and Roosevelt to make an announcement at their conference, with appropriate flourishes. A “New York Times” correspondent in London says: It is considered that the two leaders will discuss: (1) A settlement of the Polish-Russian dispute which has for too long been an irritant in the Allied relations. (2) Occupation arrangements for Germany. (3) Swift energetic prosecution of the war against Japan as soon as possible after the end of hostilities in Europe. A Washington correspondent of the “New York Times” reports 1 : “Mr. Roosevelt conferred for an hour with Admirals Leahy and King and Generals Marshall and Arnold. Presumably it was a prelude to his meeting with Mr. Churchill, which the President hinted was imminent.” The Office of War Information and the War and Navy Departments have issued a joint statement cautioning that rumours of Germany’s surrender should not be accepted unless confirmed by General Eisenhower. The statement added: “It is possible there will not be a single day which can be called the end of the war with Germany, because surrender may be piecemeal instead of en masse.” GREATER SECRECY. (Rec. 10.45 a.m.) NEW YORK September 10. The secrecy enwrapping the last Quebec Conference will be even stricter this time, according to Canadian authorities, says the “New York Times’s” Ottawa correspondent. The main business will be the war against Japan, which is expected to become a joint Anglo-American operation, in which, in addition to Canada and Australia, the French Provisional Government and Holland have indicated a determination to participate. The conference differs from its predecessor because in consequence of the coming election Mr. Roosevelt cannot commit the United States to the same extent as Mr. Churchill can Britain, where a change of Government does not entail a reversal of major policies. Therefore, to some extent the meeting will be concerned with consideration of all possible political emergencies and the preservation in all circumstances of the AngloAmerican co-.operation on the same happy basis as permitted a successful conduct of the war against Germany. MR. CHURCHILL ARRIVES. (Rec. 11.45 a.m.) OTTAWA, Sept. 10. Mr. Churchill and his party have arrived at Quebec. INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATION SMALLER POWERS’ STATUS NEV/ YORK, Sept. 9. The Washington correspondent of the “New York Times” learns that the Russian phase of the Dumbarton Oaks Conference has been extended. This is because differences have arisen between Russia on the one hand and Britain and America on the other, concerning the role of the smaller Powers in the proposed international organisation. The Russian delegation contends that the proposed League’s effectiveness will be impaired by giving much authority to the smaller Powers, 4 whereas the British and American delegations argue that the effectiveness of the League would be greatly impaired if the rights and susceptibilities of the smaller Powers were to be ignored. All three delegations accepted it as a principle that all nations, regardless of their* size and power, are equal to their right to justice. At the same time all three rejected the Wilsonian concept that there should be equality of functions for all of the States, and that the principle of unanimity must prevail. But differences have arisen over how much authority should be given to the States other than the Big Four, and particularly over the middle States, such as Brazil, the Netherlands, and some of the British Dominions, whose contributions to the preventing of aggression, ai’e genei'ally recognised as being far greater than the capacities of many of the smaller States. Russia does not want to give the smaller Powers any veto over any plan approved by all of the Big Four. Russia does not believe that the plans of the Big Four should be subject to any veto by any combination of the smaller Powers in the Council. The British and American delegates have pointed out that it is most unlikely that the smaller Powers would wish to combine to halt any action against a potential aggressor. In general, Russia appears inclined to place more reliance on separate agreement among the Big Four as the most effective way to halt aggression, while Britain and America tend more to a universal solution of the problem.