A WARNING

Grey River Argus, 4 May 1935, Page 5

A WARNING

TO REARMED GERMANY FROM BRITAIN Will Resist Aggression POLICY STATED IN PARLIAMENT. (Received Mav 3. at 5.5 p.m.) LONDON, May 2. Speaking in the House of Commons, Sir Austen Chamberlain said he hoped Sir .1. Simon would give them a fuller revelation regarding the German mind. He asked: Did Germany want the dictated peace of Versailles to be sub stituted by a peace dictated from Berlin? (Cheers). Ho protested against the sending only of an observer to the Rome Conference. Austrian independence, he said, was the ■‘keypiece of European peace.’’ If German} had the partner mind, then she would welcome Austria’s independence. If she thought she could extract her own will she would find this country in her path again! With Britain, he said, she would find all of the great free commonwealths around it, and she would meet 11 force which would again be her master. (Cheers). sir •!. Simon, closing the debate, denied that the Government had gone back upon the Covenant of the Leagueof Nations, or had accepted ■Regional Pacts as an alternative. These were not competitive methods. The Treaty of Locarno itself, was a Regional Pact. Asnwering Sir Herbert Samuel (Liberal Leader) Sir J. Simon explained that if Germany attacked Russia, and if a Treaty of Mutual Assistance made France assist ’Russia, the Locarno Treaty placed Britain under no obligation to assist Germany. Sir J. Simon said that undoubted!} the rate of production of aeroplanes in Germany had increased much more rapidlv than Britain’s advisers thought to lo' likelv last autumn. Since ho had seen Herr Hitler in Berlin, he had ascertained that the statement that “Germany had reached parity "'itJ Britain in air” was intended to imply ‘hat Germany’s first line of strength was between 800 and 850 machines. That figure did not include the Auxiharv or the Special Reserve units, but in'Britain’s ease, it included machines

Sir .1. Simon concluded: “Germany is now helping herself to equality. It is unilateral action. We have kept the door open to Germany. Me did not engage in a senseless, endless, hopeless competition piling up of armaments, but we are bound to establish Ihe safety of this country. We have a great wark to do as a mediator. As such, we implore Germany to show she is prepared to take her part, not only in word but in deed. The debate was adjourned. Mr. MacDonald’s Speech (British Official Wireless.) RUGBY May 2. The eagerly-awaited debate cm foreign affairs, in the C-mmuim, was aotab'e for a firm declara'ion of British policy by the Prime Minister. “That policy,” he declared, “was not aimed at military alliances, but at the widest possible co-operation. Every other nation will be welcomed in this free companionship. The outlook 1 sav this with great conviction and considerable intimacy of knowledge—has chances of appeasement, as well as palpable dangers and it is the constant care of Britain to help on the chances that must come from negotiated agreements without disturbance to the peace of Europe or the world. Mr MacDonald made an earnest plea for German co-operation in the maintenance of peace and the limitation of armaments, especially in the air. Tracing the events since February 3rd, the Prime Minister recalled that' the London declaration of that date stated that one of the objects ‘he negotiations contemplated was. a freely-negotiated armaments pact with Girnianv and other Powers, to take the place of military clauses of the Versailles Treaty. If that could be done successfully, the greater part of the immediate European dangers would disappear. Clearly, the London declaration indicated that they were moving away from the Versailles regime, and were entering upon European relationship, based upon free negotiations for security and of armed strength. On February 3rd, Governments like their own which had begun patiently to re-establish goodwill in Europe had good cause for feeling that the prospects were improving, and when shortly afterwards Germany accepted the declaration, at any- rate as a basis for discussion, their hope was strengthened. It was greatly to be deplored that, at the moment, the German Government announced its intention to impose conscription, and to take immediate steps to raise the

peace strength to 550,000, as well as to create a military air force. While the historian must deal with the trend of events, the politician had to face the actual situation, practically and objectively, and. one hoped, with calm commonsense. The politician had to decide between abandoning the attempt to build up on general confidence a peace system in Europe, or looking for a refuge in those combinations of sheer force which had never yet saved him from war, and never would.

When they considered the future, it was well to know that Hitler had said that, though he would sign nothing which he felt he could not carry out. yet if he gave an undertaking, he would never break it. Be it also noted that Hitler has publicly declared the readiness and determination of the (terman Government to accept both the spirit and the letter of the Locarno Pact. The declaration of February 3 gave general satisfaction all over’ Europe, because, it promised the beginning of a sound European settlement. Nothing had been done at Stresa which changed that declaration. Indeed, the text of the Stresa conclusions reaffirmed point after point, of the London communique, and it was : m portant that this should be emphasised. The London declaration made proposals for the ending of certain central and eastern European fears and unsettlement, by a system of noninterference and mutual security I pacts. Britain was not directly afI footed by those proposals but looked I upon them, or any variation of them I that might be made in order to se--1 cur > the desired result, with a friendly

eye and advice, wherever its advice seemed welcome or useful. That the negotiations should Jbe put ithrough with the idea of producing something really effective in regard to Central Europe, the Italian Government proposed to convoke a meeting of the Governments concerned, including Germany, to discuss a .scheme. The British Government would not be represented at Rome by a delegation, because it was well understood that they were not undertaking any new commitments in this regard, but they would be represented by an observer, so that they might be kept in closest touch with' the course of the discussions, and could contribute in any way that seemed to them useful and proper. As regards Eastern Europe, Germany was especially able to make a valuble contribution to a system of security in that region.

Mr MacDonald continued that the German Chancellor, during Sir J. Simon’s visit to Berlin, declared his willingness in principle to negotiate a multiple non-aggression pact with Eastern European countries, and although they had hoped Germany would be prepared to join in a more comprehensive arrangement, nevertheless the proposals put forward by Hitler ought not* to be allowed to drop, and they trusted Germany herself to take immediate steps to promote in a more concrete shape the idea which the Chancellor had formulated. There was no reason why such a non-aggression pact should not harmonise with a mutual guarantee pact, which France ami other governments wore now negotiating, ami indeed in his (Mr MacDonald’s opinion, the two could very well supplement each other, and thus help

towards creating a complete system of collective security in Eastern Europe. “I wish to make it clear,’’ said the Prime Minister, “that so far as this Government is concerned we did not and do not consider that the security which the London declaration is meant to establish can be complete without Germany participation when the whole declaration was reviewed the Stresa policy pursued by the British delegates was to maintain the possibility of such co-operation. All these

activities assumed tjhe idea of collective security in some form or another. The general attitude of the Government is to approach the problem with a flexible mind, in order to obtain as far as possible the realisation of the idea with its effective check upon aggression. It is manifest and indisputable that when these efforts are being made to build up an instrument of co-operation and goodwill, in which Germany would take due and proper part, such unilateral declarations as those just made in B'er'in regarding land, air and naval forces must profoundly disturb the peace of mind of the whole of Europe. The Government have taken note of every helpful suggestion made in Berlin, or elsewhere, but they must observe that some feeling of mutual confidence has to be re-created before the full beneficial effect to international negotiations on details can be reach cd. The instructions we took with us to Stresa did not exclude any country, on account of what had happened, from taking part in further negotiations on the lines of the London declaration. Nothing done at Stresa annulled that declaration. We recognised with great regret that circumstances had changed, but the general purpose of that declaration will be a great calamity if there is any weakening or deterioration in the confidence which exists between France. Italy and ourselves. and we shall take all care that shall not happen. Our aim is to increase tho. number of co-operators, and try to prevent by every means their being separated into different and rival camps. Will not Germany now come over and show her readiness to help to restore international confidence, so rudely shaken by her recent independent action. In regard to armaments, the British Government is convinced that international co-operation is the only basis on which world peace could rest. ’ ’

NAVAL ISSUE. Referring to arrangements made for preliminary discussions in Loudon on naval matters with the Gormen representatives, the Prime Minister confessed to great surprise that the present moment was chosen by Germany to announce a ship building programme, especially including submarines. It would be difficult to imagine this would be of no concern to Britain. British naval memans and ration could m>t be fixed in relation to home waters alone. Britain had unique responsibilities of world-wide character, different from other Powers. They were prepared to let every naval Power in the world know what these needs were, and come to an international agreement, which would make expansion beyond rock bottom needs unnecessary. Thus preventing extravagance and waste. “The German decision to build submarines is ominous, and I do not intend to minimise its gravity, but we still are prepared without in any way conceding the right to disregard any treaty provisions to receive German representatives in London for the contemplated preliminary conversations. These would be carried on in precisely the same conditions as were those with the United States and Japan.”

OPPOSITION CRITICISM. LONDON, May 2. Mr Lansbury, following Mr MacDonald, said that Labour was most, disappointed with the Prime Minister’s statement. After three years of disarmament talk, he largely dealt with an increase in armamants, as a preliminary basis to peace. Had the Government gone back on the League Covenant in favour of relying on four or five nations? Labour had no confidence in peace pacts based on enormous armaments, but had great faith in peace through the League. He congratulated the Government on leaving the door wide open for Germany to come in.

Sir Herbert Samuel said that public opinion would not support wholehearted alliances with other Powers against Germany. Because of an uneasy consciousness there was some substance in the German allegation that the Powers refusing to disarm were equally guilty of a breach of the Versailles Treaty, as the Powers were rearming. At the same time, Hitler had consolidated British opinion to an extent which could not have been foreseen. Germany should be given to understand from all quarters of the House, that if she pursued her present course and did not come to an arms limitation agreement, she would compel the resentment and disapproval of every section of the British people. CONSERVATIVES DISSATISFIED. LONDON, May 2. Mr MacDonald’s statement, despite

its strong tone against Germany, has caused considerable restlessness among the Conservatives, particularly those who are pressing fur vast air forces. The impression 'in the lobbies was that Mr MacDonald still hoped for Germany’s co-operation for collective security. The Conservatives say that, the Government must immediately be forced to work every aeroplane factory in Britain to capacity. Enormous Increase PLANNED FOR BRITISH AIR FORCE. (Aus. and N.Z. Cable Assn.) LONDON, May 3 The Daily Mail, in a leading article, says: The country would have welcomed a definite declaration that an adequate air programme would im mediately be begun. The fact that General Goering is aiming at parity with France, which is four times Britains strength, indicates the uiagitude of Britains task.

The “News Chronicle’’, in a leading article ‘says: —No British Gov eminent, however passionately it i? advocating peace could fall behind its neighbours in its air force. Nevertheless, the public would only asquies if the Government continues building up of collective security in which the door would be open to

Germany. The “Daily Mail’s political cor respondent says:—A Cabinet Subcommittee, which has been instruct cd that Britain must build aeroplanes until they are equal to Germany has boon formed to draw up plans in conjunction with the Air Ministry. Little advance is possible fo v several months, as a foundation for the production of aeroplanes and for personnel must be laid in the meantime. The cabinet has agreed as to tho .necessity for developing facilities for training the personnel. Lady Houston sent a message to Lord Londonderry (Air Minister) saying:—“ln order to commemorate the jubilee and also in view of the dire necessity, I renew my offer of two hundred thousand sterling for the air defence of London.’’ She recalled Mr Neville Chamberlains previous rejection of her offer, as it was impossible to accept gifts in excess of the expenditure that parliament approved. The “Daily Telegraph’s” political correspondent understands that the new air programme will be presented to the House of Commons later in the month. It will involve speedy and substantial expansion, and not merely an acceleration of the programme. It has already been announced that the Government intends ot ask for a supplementary estimate. Steps arc also being taken to extend the training facilities. BRITISH AEROPLANES FOR GERMANY. LONDON. May 2. In the Commons. Mr Runciman informed Mr Cocks that during 1934, ninety-six aeroplane engines were exported by Britain to Germany, but none in the first quarter of 1935. Mr Cocks: In view of the illegal arming of Germany, will you prevent this export? Mr Runciman: The export of these engines d,oes not require a license. There is no reason to suppose that engines exported for civil aeroplanes are not fit and proper subjects for export. Mr Cocks: Will you take steps to stop this trade? Mr Runciman: No. Mr Hacking told a questioner that three British officers were being attached to the German army for six weeks, and three German officers similarly with the British army. This was 'in accordance with ordinary international courtesy. Mr Thorne: Are the officers entitled to report to their respective Governments?

Mr Hacking: That is one of the objects of the exchange. We have as much to gain as Germany.