TERMS OF PEACE

Grey River Argus, 5 June 1942, Page 1

TERMS OF PEACE

TOO EARLY FOR DEFINITION. BRITISH ATTITUDE. 8.0.W. RUGBY, June 2. ‘Lord Cranborne, in reply to ths Lords’ debate on peace aims, said that while the Government sympathised with those who pressed for an immediate detailed declaration of .peace aims, there were overwhelming reasons against a unilateral declaration of policy at the present stage. “We have already put our name to the Atlantic Charter, which laid down the fundamental principles on which a peace settlement must be based, and there is no one who dissented from tiiese principles.”

He added that the application of the principles of the Charter must be a matter not for His Majesty’s Government alone, but the joint task of all nations who adhered to the Charter, when peace came. If it were a mistake to make a declaration of war aims, it was not a mistake to prepare war aims, and any responsible Government ought io the fullest extent possible, make preparations for a situation for which would arise, when the war was brought to an end. To neglect that would be a deplorable dereliction of duty. Lord Cranborne assured the Lords that exchanges of views, on questions of post-war conditions, had already taken place between His Majesty’s Government, the Dominions, United States, Russia, and the United Nations. At present these discussions were at the confidential stage, and had not yet reached the stage when a general proclamation could be made.

On the economic side, Lord Cranborne said His Majesty’s . Government was ready to consider with a a open mind all proposals brought forward on the American side, or by any other member of the United Nations, “and we shall be ready to put forward some constructive proposals of our own.”