For Discussion FROM WEEK TO WEEK

Grey River Argus, 15 February 1940, Page 10

For Discussion FROM WEEK TO WEEK

By

H. WINSTON RHODES.

The Cost of Defeat. What do we want to see happen in the present war? Have we sufficient honesty to go behind the slogans with Professor .J'. B. S. Haldane, examine the possibilities and our reactions to them? As a soldier of the last war, as a socialist and a clear thinker, Haldane knows as we all must know, unless the continual drip of propaganda has worn away our thinking apparatus, that "we can wash out any idea that the present war will be succeeded by peace, even for one generation, unless capitalism is overthrown over most of the earth’s surface.” Let there be no illusions about that, especially at a time when a united states of Europe is providing many with an escape from reality. Of course, as Haldane suggests, a socialist Britain is not likely to emerge at .the end of a year or So with or without the present government in power, and still we must ask the ques- [ Lon as socialists, "What do we wish to see happen in the present war?”

It’s no use talking about aims unless we consider means and it's no iu.se talking about means unless we consider aims. Haldane tries to deal with the situation as it seems to be at present, not as it might be, not as some of the Labour leaders hope it will be. And right at the outset one thing must be made clear. None of us who spoke and wrote and worked against fascism, neither liberals, socialists nor communists, has anything but loathing and contempt for the Nazi regime. There is no need to mince matters. We know that in the event of a victory for Hitler we have everything to lose and nothing to gain. We know what is the Nazi attitude to democracy, to racial minorities to culture, to peace and to liberals, socialists and communists. We know it better than those who would not listen to us in the days before the war. The Cost of Victory. What Haldane is concerned about I is whether this war is likely to lead to the downfall of Hitlerism and all that it stands for. Have we coneifiered the cost and consequences of a complete victory for the Allies? It is almost inconceivable that a decisive resttit could be achieved by either side on the western front unless millions are hurled to the slaughter or unless there is breakdown inside Germany. It is that breakdown for which everyone is wishing and for which presumably the allies are working (without desiring complete collapse which might lead to communism). The breakdown might come in a military way at the cost of unrestricted aerial ' warfare which would leave half of i Europe in ruins. It might come j through blockade. But who will sufi for from the blockade? The antifascists (our allies) inside Germany, the anti-fascists of Czecho-Slovakia, ‘of Poland and Austria. And one ; thing must not be forgotten if we 1 ore working for blockade, and that I is that the Soviet Union has announ- ; cod that the attempts to starve the ■ civilian population must be regarded as an infringement of international conventions. j But in any event the victory of the i allies, says Haldane, “could not- ensure peace even for ten years, let. 1 alone the twenty years between the Treaty of Versailles and the present i war. The suggestion that the youth 1 of Britain and France should be sac- ! rificed for such a proposal is moni ctrous.” For the victory of the al- ; Fes means, as far as we know at ■ present, the restoration of similar . monarchist or military groups to ; those against which we fought in ; 2914-18, or an association of small i federated states which would leave ' out the Soviet Union.

Extending the War. It is possible that the theatre of war may be extended to the Balkans whether for the purpose of stopping a south-eastern drive by Germany or overcoming the inevitable stalemate on the western front 1 or switching the war against the Soviet Union now instead of later cannot be said. Certainly the signs arc significant. Turkey refused a bilateral pact of mutual assistance with the Soviet Union, refused to close the Bosphorous to warships of non-Black Sea Powers and chose to Ink up with Britain and France. She disregarded the warning of Molotov that she would thereby abandon “the cautious policy of neutrality and enter the orbit of the European war.” General Weygand. well-known for his anti-Soviet attitude is in command of considerable forces in the Middle East.

I In view of all the propaganda both I direct and indirect for the switching of the war, in view of the open 1 and unashamed statements in France as well as England such a possibility cannot be ignored. It would involve the abandonment of many of the alleged war aims if a repentant Germany were to lead the attack, but the important thing, as Haldane insists, is that “while there is the possibility and as long as it is a possibility actually canvassed in the British and French press the Soviet government will be bound to take steps such as the present operations in Finland, designed to protect itself.”

A People's Peace. Professor Haldane does not welcome with enthusiasm a complete allied victory because it would not ensure peace, as a socialist he does not welcome the switching of the war There is only one other alternative. I give it in Haldane’s words because i it fits in very well with what I was I writing last week in this column be- | fere I had read Haldane. “If the British and French Governments were to agree to an armis--I'Ce. and the calling of a peace conference including representatives of lhe Soviet Union and ' other European neutrals, and if 'possible of the U.S.A., the situation would be changed. For Hitler can only keep his following in Germany if he can make the German people believe that he is for peace, while the British and French Governments are for v.ar. He could not do so if he refused to participate. Such a peace would only be possible if the various states agreed to accept the principle of self-determination. This wouM mean that if the Poles and Finns were allowed (q decide their own form of government, so would the Indians, Annamites, and Albanians, to ment’on no others. “While we must not suppose that self-determination without ' 1

Socialism- would mean a permanent peace, it would be a step in that direction. I believe, therefore, that every progressive, whether Socialist or not, should work for a People’s Peace at the earliest possible date.” I wonder what the New Zealand Labour Government has to say to Professor Haldane’s thoughtful remarks.