NEW ZEALAND SUPPORTS GREEK CLAIMS

Greymouth Evening Star, 18 September 1946, Page 7

NEW ZEALAND SUPPORTS GREEK CLAIMS

Need for Frontier Changes Surprise at Bulgarian Demands [N.Z.P.A. Special Correspondent.] (Rec. 9.50 a.m.) LONDON, Sept. 17. New Zealand’s sympathy with the Greek claims for frontier rectification and her surprise at the position in which Greece has been placed by the Bulgarian demands was clearly stated by Mr. A. D. M’clntosh, in the Bulgarian Territorial Commission yesterday. Mr. Mclntosh said: “The spectacle of a defeated aggressor State seriously putting forward proposals for the cession by a victor State of a considerable part of its best territories is most remarkable. To have them supported, apparently wholeheartedly, by several of the other Allied victorious Powers is also so remarkable that the New Zealand delegation could not fail to follow closely the arguments advanced for such an attitude.” “Should Remain Greek.” Mr. Mclntosh said that the Bulgarian claims, according to their supporters, were based generally on the grounds of historic justice and the necessity for economic access to the Aegean Sea. On’the first argument New Zealand considered that justice demanded recognition of the fact that the population was now predominantly Greek, despite recent attempts to change it. New Zealand, therefore, considered the area in question should, remain Greek.

New Zealand did not consider that the second argument, adducing economic access to the sea as justification for territorial acquisition, could be regarded as valid in the twentieth century. “If this were to be regarded as a criterion of territorial change, the maps of Europe and other continents might look very different from what they are,” remarked Mr. McIntosh.

Greece’s claim for a more satisfactory strategic frontier for her northern provinces was one which in the light of the recent war could not fail to receive sympathetic consideration, especially from New Zealand, whose forces fought alongside the Greeks and who claimed to have some knowledge, dearly gained, of this strategic problem. “Greek sacrifices drew us closely together in the common cause,” said Mr. Mclntosh, “but we were brought to realise only too vividly and too soon the poor defensive possibilities of northern Greece. Indeed, before the New Zealand Government was asked to agree to use its forces in the Greek campaign it was warned by the Allied commanders that there was no defensive position on the northeast before the Aliakmon line.” Wishessof Population. The Greek resolution, continued Mr. Mclntosh, proposed a new frontier line. Whether that line or any other approaching it provided better cover for defensive forces was a matter for technical miltary study. When that was done it remained to ascertain the wishes and interests of the population involved in any frontier changes. New Zealand had already made it known that it favoured consultation with populations before any changes of this description were made and that it supported the provision of effective guarantees for the protection of the inhabitants concerned. It remained to be seen whether, apart from frontier rectification, any other method could be devised of providing security for the gallant but war-torn country of Greece. , „ With a view to enabling a study of this aspect of the matter New, Zealand supported the Greek proposals, but suggested that any other possible protecting Greek security should also be studied.