SOVIET AND PERSIA

Grey River Argus, 1 April 1946, Page 5

SOVIET AND PERSIA

KEVIN’S COMMENT “19th Century Imperialism 5 ’ (Rec. 10.5). LONDON, March 30. “From the Security Council’s discussions' at New York, a fundamental principle has arisen—it is improper for a great Power to negotiate, or to’ attempt to negotiate, or to obtain, concessions from a small Power by putting troops in occupation,” said Rt. Hon. E. Bevin, in a speech at a trade unionist meeting at Bristol. That is nineteenth century imperialism.”

He said that great Powers might get into conflict when vital raw materials were concerned. Proper machinery must be established to deal with that problem, but it was not to be dealt with by old methods. “Britain is already endeavouring to secure universal agreement over oil,” he said. There would be other difficulties arising over other raw materials, as time went on.

. Mr Bevin said that, possibly, there were differences in temperament, and possibly differences of approach, among the nations. These might arise from fear of fresh attacks. They might be accentuated by the development of atomic energy. “All these factors tend to keep people, government, and everybody on tenderhooks,” he said. “I think we all want to set agreement, or a declaration that, whatever happens; we shan’t use armies to settle disputes. We al 1 have to leave behind the method of negotiating under duress.” He added that it was not by propaganda that the World Organisation was built up, but by patient, steady, gruelling work. A member of the Persian Cabinet. Firouz, as official spokesman, to-day repudiated “certain statements” made by Hussein Ala (Persian Ambassador at Washington), to the United Nations Security Council at New York. Firouz said that a Russian evacuation was proceeding steadily. A Reuter correspondent says: It is not clear which of Hussein Ala’s statements have been repudiated. Firouz said that Hussein Ala was doing his duty according to his in; structions, but was allowing patriotism and sentiment to control him. Some of his statements' were exaggerated. Premier Sultaneh was satisfied with the progress of the Russian evacuation of Persia, but he was anxious for the removal of the foreign troops as soon as possible. TEHERAN, March 29.

The Persian Ministry of the Interior announced that the Russians have evacuated the entire Mazanderan province from Firuzkuh to the Caspian Sea and from Babalmilan to the border.

The Red rArmy never maintained large garrisons in Mazanderan. Travellers from the province recently reported that road blocks were manned by armed civilians, wearing Tudeh (Left Wing Party) arm bands. A Persian staff officer announced that the Persian forces were ordered not to enter the areas evacuated by the Russians. Red Army forces from Mianeh and Zenjan came into Kazvin in trains on their way to Caspian ports. (Rec.' 10.30). TEHERAN, March 30. The British Parliamentary delegation, consisting of Messrs Foot and Head, arrived at Cairo on Saturday. The new British Ambassador, Sir Ronald Campbell, after visiting Sidky Pasha, said that negotiations for the revision of the Anglo-Egyptian Treaty would soon start. NEW YORK, March 30. The Soviet’s walk-out from the Security Council is still a puzzle. It is not known why Russia failed to reply l to Britain’s two Notes inquiring why the Soviet had not withdrawn its troops from Persia in conformity with the 1942 treaty, or why, if, as M. Gromyko states, an agreement had already been reached between Russia and Persia, the representatives of both countries should not come to the council table and say what the agreement was. Comment here is that Russia handled the position with “extreme clumsiness’’ and is pursuing a course of ! al '‘blundering, suspicion's giant, throwing its weight about and hurting itself and everyone else.” There is a good deal of guessing at what will occur between now and April 10. It is remarked that Mr Bevin had shown shrewdness in not attending the Security Council meetings in New York. His absence, while not weakening Britain’s position in any way, is placing a greater weight of responsibility for action upon Mr Byrnes and the American delegation, which on this occasion is certainly being more forthright and outspoken than it ever was in London.