Greymouth Evening Star. TUESDAY, AUGUST 6, 1946. The Paris Conference

Greymouth Evening Star, 6 August 1946, Page 6

Greymouth Evening Star. TUESDAY, AUGUST 6, 1946. The Paris Conference

|T is apparent that the delegates of the 17 smaller nations at the Paris Conference are not taking kindly to the idea that they are expected to ratify a series of accomplished facts or to content themselves with merely recommending changes in the peace treaty drafts. That is a healthy sign. As experience at the. San Francisco Conference showed, wisdom is not a monopoly of the Great Powers. Indeed, if by acute criticism and the mobilisation of opinion, the smaller nations are able to bring strong influence to bear, it may yet be possible to achieve a peace settlement containing at least a modicum of justice. The functions of the conference are strictly limited. According to the agreement reached by the British, American and Russian Foreign Ministers at Moscow last December, it is to “consider” only the draft treaties with Italy, Bulgaria, Rumania, Hungary and Finland as prepared in advance by the “BigFour.” In other words the delegates of the smaller nations are for all practical purposes bound by the prior decisions of the Foreign Ministers’ Council. Mr. Molotov -wanted to fix the conference rules of procedure by “Big Four” fiat, as well as to hold it strictly to the terms hammered out by the Foreign Ministers. A revolt has now broken out in the ranks of the smaller nations.

It has to be recognised, however, that some of the major points of the draft treaties were decided on only after much argument by the ct ßig Four,’ and prolonged insistence on their revision now might result only in nullifying much of the work already done. For that reason, the will of the “Big Four” is likely to prevail on this occasion. As things are at present the treaties cannot be made effective unless they have the assent of all the principal Allied States. Tn other words, the Powers which bore the main burden of the war insist on fixing the basis of peace.

The smaller nations, and with them the common people of the world, may find it possible to derive some hope from the fact that this conference marks only the beginning of the peace making and that by their work in Paris the delegates of the smaller countries may possibly succeed in altering the shape of things to come. The cases of Austria, Germany and Japan have yet to be considered by the “Big Four.” Indeed the central problem of European peace is the settlement with Germany, and the indications are that it will prove the most thorny of all.

Bread Rationing in Britain •yHE new cuts in bread consumption in Britain, were not in themselves severe. For a people who by this stage were entitled to expect an alleviation of their heavy war-time burdens they came, however, as something approaching the nature of the last straw. It is not surprising therefore that the British people should have become restive under the new restrictions, and that the cable news since their imposition should have given almost continuous evidence of their unpopularity:

Bread rationing came as the climax to the series of shocks the British public has had since the end of the war. Already in an effort to economise in the consumption of wheat Britain had cut the weight, of the ordinary loaf from two pounds to one and three-quarter, pounds, and had progressively raised the flour extraction rate to 90 per cent., giving her. “the blackest bread in history.” It is worth noting for comparative purposes in this respect that the extraction rate of the flour from which is made New Zealand’s present bread of slightly greyish hue is only 80 per cent. The food crisis is not over. There is a tendency to discount reports of its severity and no doubt a prominent member of the British Cabinet, Mr. Morrison, had this in mind when lie emphasised a statement which he had made on a previous occasion. In 1947, he said, the famine threat might dominate the world as badly as, and perhaps worse than, this year. The shortage is no transient or local one, but a world—wide crisis, caused by disastrous harvests coining on top of the losses and dislocation due to war’. It can be met in the first place only by authoritative international action. ' A proposal to form an. Emergency Food Council has now been before the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation for some months, and, despite Russia’s recent declaration that she would not join it, the indications are that its establishment will be proceeded with. If it has not the support of Russia, whose reticence on the matter of food supplies has been one puzzling feature of international relationships, the emergency council must be limited iff work and scale. It should nevertheless be able to do much to ensure that those counti ies at present scraping the bottom of the bin will be less hungry should disaster ever overtake them again.