The Grey River Argus SATURDAY, April 24th, 1937. A LONE HAND PEACEMAKER.

Grey River Argus, 24 April 1937, Page 8

The Grey River Argus SATURDAY, April 24th, 1937. A LONE HAND PEACEMAKER.

'Whichever way it may be looked at. either as ominous or as reassuring, the mission undertaken by the former leader of the British Labour Party, Mr George Lansbury, must enlist peculiar interest. It is not yet obtaining any official approval, or at anyrate any favourable publicity, but the best judge of its value may not be either the politicians in power or the press. Going to see Herr Hitler on his own initiative, Mr Lansbury obtained at least the assurance of German co-opera-lion in any genuine world conference the object of which would be the consolidation of peace and the removal of those political, commercial and other rivalries which are the real levers of war. ft may be inferred both that Mr Lansbury sees there is a growing danger, and that he sees also the possibility of removing such danger, not to say the necessity of doing so, .as well as the lack of a timely go-between. The secret approval of the British Government may be with him, but it may be that his best hopes are reposed in the role of a lone hand, which he would appear to be playing. He could not, of course, expect to be able himself to vary the attitude of any Government. The most he can do is to ascertain beyond reasonable doubt how far the policies of the Powers are reconcilable with the

objective of peace. As lias been repeated in the press cables, his interview with Herr Hitler gave rise to a communique in which it was stated a conference which Germany would enter must be one ■well prepared for, so that every participant may know just what to expect, and know that there is unanimity in a determination to agree on a basis of lasting peace. The barometer of the situation is obviously the race in armaments. Thus the first effect of a successful world conference would be a slackening of this rivalry. It is given the name of an economic recovery, or a national insurance, or anything else, so long as the masses can be induced to regard it as protective, instead of as bding so provocative as it really may prove. Mr Lansbury may discern the authentic sign that the Powers generally are finding the pace already is decidedly too hot for them financially. Armaments historially have nieaiit war, and the European War, if anything, meant the next thing to international bankruptcy. The more conservative elements in Britain appear to fear such a result if the present race in armaments leads as surely as the last one led to war. Thus Mr Lansbury may have the silent benediction of untold millions in his individual move Io bring Europe once again together in some sort of amity that has a foundation of reality. That his press critics are perhaps hasty and shortsighted is suggested by the decision of Mr Lansbury to persevere with his endeavour, and to proceed to interview Signor Mussolini. His faith lies doubtless in the knowledge that historically Europe is a unit, the home of civilization, which, if it go into dissolution, will drag the world into chaos. Mr Lansbury is a veteran statesman who well knows all of the shams of politics, and he has one assurance in ihis excursion into diplomacy. He cannot do any worse than the official elements, and he may do a lot better. He is right in assuming that lasting peace must repose on unity of aim. President Roosevelt has repeatedly been suggested as a suitable initiator of such a movement, but he has enough on hand, and has declined the honour. If, as is by no means outside the range of possibility, Mr Lansbury paves the way for a better understanding among all of the European Powers he will have done a service the value of which will be beyond calculation.