IDEAL OF PEACE

Manawatu Standard, Volume LVIII, Issue 231, 29 August 1938, Page 7

IDEAL OF PEACE

WORLD CO-OPERATION.

SIR J. SIMON’S PLEA

WHERE BRITAIN STANDS

(United Press Association.—By Electric Telegra pli.—Copyi iglit.) (British Official Wireless.)

RUGBY, Aug. 27. A speecli Ey Sir John Simon (Chancellor of the Exchequer), at a Rational Government demonstration at Lanark, to-day, was almost entirely devoted to foreign affairs. At the end a general exposition of the present Government’s foreign policy was given. i

Sir John Simon turned to the particular case of Czechoslovakia, which, he said, was very much in the public mind at the moment. He recalled that Britain’s position had been fully and accurately defined in Mr Chamberlain’s speech in the House of Commons on March 24. Sir John added: “That declaration holds good to-day. There is nothing to add or to vary in its content.”

The Chancellor emphasised the point that a solution of the controversy in Czechoslovakia required contributions from all concerned. The Government had recognised that there was a real problem in Czechoslovakia which needed urgently to be solved, but it was convinced that, given goodwill on all sides, a solution could be found which would be just to all legitimate interests. “There is no need,” Sir John said,

“to stress the importance of finding a peaceful solution, for, in the modern world, there are no limits to the reactions of war. This very case of Czechoslovakia may be so critical for the future of Europe that it would be impossible to assume any limit to the disturbance which a conflict might involve, and everyone in every country who considers the consequences has to bear that in mind.”

STRIKING SPEECH. They would all have read, Sir John continued, the striking speech made the'” other day by Mr Cordell Hull (United States Secretary of. State) which laid stress on the widespread reactions of war and on the necessity for substituting for the use of force in international relations methods of friendly co-operation. What Mr Hull had said then and what President Roosevelt said a few days later in Canada must have wakened a responsive echo in many British hearts. Referring to Lord Runciman’s mission in Prague, Sir John Simon said that the good wishes of all the world, which, realised how much hung upon his Success, were with him in the task he had undertaken with such public spirit—going to Prague not as an arbitrator nor a judge, but as a medi ator and friend. He was there in no sense as the representative of Britain, but as the representative of all men everywhere who desired justice and who loved peace. “I am convinced that all reasonable people of every nation must desire to assist rather than hamper his endeavours to bring the several elements of the Czechoslovak problem to a just settlement,” added Sir John. “Meanwhile it is the duty not only of us but of all others —and all are concerned in world peace —to do nothing to imperil a satisfactory conclusion, and, as I have already said, we firmly believe that, 'if the right spirit prevails, a peaceful settlement reconciling all interests and claims will be attained.”

LITTLE RESPITE. Sir John Simon said that the international situation gave His Majesty’s Ministers little respite. He defined the general policy of the Government in foreign affairs as being a positive policy of peace. It had been a year of great anxiety and difficulty, and in nothing had Mr Chamberlain’s leadership been more marked than in the reBolute and positive efforts that he and Lord Halifax (Foreign Secretary) had made to reduce tension and promote appeasement. . For his part, Sir John said that he repudiated altogether the • attitude which was tempted to say that war was inevitable. He would rather proclaim the view that, if all nations alike would do their utmost to remove the causes that might lead to war, and would try to meet in a fair spirit all difficulties, from whatever quarter they came, war was never inevitable. - There were great countries in Europe with systems of government very different from the British and which no one of them, brought up as they were in the traditions of Parliamentary democracy, would accept for themselves, but that was no rea.* son why they .should conduct foreign policy as if friendship was impossible with these States of wide! y-diff ©rent political systems. With reference to the ideal oF peace and the position of the League of Nations, Sir John Simon said: “All the efforts of Britain have been directed to strengthening the # foundations or peace and the adoption of argument and reason in the settlement of international differences. For we are convinced that true solutions cannot be found by the use of violent measures. REPERCUSSIONS LIKELY. “Apart from the loss through suffering and death which accompany such measures, their adoption in any good instance may easily have repercussions which might,' in certain circumstances, involve others, besides the parties at first concerned,” proceeded the Chancellor. , “Once this process has begun, who can say where it will end P It was a realisation of this that led to the adoption of the ideals and principles lonning the basis of the League, and it has been a matter of profound regret to Britain that the absence of a number of important nations lias so gravely weakened the League. If, however, as an instrument it has been found on occasion not capable of bearing the strain imposed upon it, that does not mean that we should abandon its printhat, just as the people of this country have a deep and abiding love of peace and a corresponding hatred of war, so have people of all other nations,” said Sir John. ‘ I believe that everywhere the man in the stree desires to lead liis life in an atmosphere of quietude and security, looking forward to the enjoyment for 'himself and his children of the gqod things of life and hating and dreading the awful consequences which modern war brings upon all alike.’ Concluding his speech Sir John Simon said: “Beginning a conflict is like beginning a fire in a high wind It is impossible to say how far it wil* spread the extent of the destruction, and how many will be called on to extinguish it. While Britain will fight to discharge her duties and protect the interests of the Empire peoples, we will always bring our whole weight and influence to prevent war anywhere in the world.”