The Gisborne Herald. IN WHICH IS INCORPORATED "THE TIMES." GISBORNE, TUESDAY, MARCH 5, 1946. RUSSIAN POLICY AND THE MIDDLE EAST

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXXIII, Issue 21962, 5 March 1946, Page 2

The Gisborne Herald. IN WHICH IS INCORPORATED "THE TIMES." GISBORNE, TUESDAY, MARCH 5, 1946. RUSSIAN POLICY AND THE MIDDLE EAST

r jpilH diplomatic correspondent of the Sunday Times declares Hint Russia's action in maintaining - troops in certain parts of Persia is regarded as the first open, flagrant violation of an international treaty since the end of the war. This statement is no more than the truth and, in conjunction with the intensification of Moscow's anti-British campaign, it gives cause for added concern over the present relationship between the Soviet Union and the Western Powers. Pending a Russian reply 1o the request, for a fuller explanation of the policy being adopted in Persia, final judgment should be withheld, but on the reports available at the moment it does appear that the Kremlin is going to dangerously extreme lengths in carrying out its avowed policy of ensuring that no country can threaten the Soviet frontiers. Any attempt to remain indefinitely in northern and northwestern Persia, including the. troubled Azerbaijan area, points inevitably to a longer-term project involving early resumption of the war of nerves against Turkey and the fostering of a general situation in the Middle East of vital importance to British interests. This may be one of the reasons why Moscow’s persistent criticism of other nations is for the present directed at Britain rather than America. The United States, however, knows well enough what Russian aggression in the Middle East would mean. Although her most obvious concern is the Far East and the evidence of Soviet espionage in Canada, America could not stand aloof from any conflict initiated in any part of the world by Soviet disregard for small nations and a policy of deliberate treaty-flouting. The only bright spot—and it could make all the difference between peace and war—is that intransigence on the part of the Soviet leaders will draw Britain and America closer together in both spirit and concrete action. In the strength of the democracy these two Powers represent, and not in Communism, lies the hope of the world. Russia is entitled to her political and economic system, but not to attempt to force it on to other countries which, if allowed to do so by their big neighbour, would tread the path of greater freedom.

It is some time since the Russians started their verbal campaign against Turkey and it would be idle to expect that, although little has been reported about the subject in recent weeks, all pressure in that direction has been abandoned. The Soviet Union originally pressed for a modification of the status of the Dardanelles, a rectification of the frontier and a more friendly attitude towards Russia. It would seem that the Soviet idea is to pile up claims against the Turks so that the first demands for Kars and Ardnahan would eventually appear reasonable and almost insignificant by comparison. The Turks, however, are of a different mould from the Persians and their reactions have always been sharp and unequivocal. They want friendship with Russia but not at the expense of sacrificing territory or prestige. That, more or less, is the attitude of most nations, and the sooner Moscow realises that any attempt to alter it by force will spell big trouble the better it will be for the world.