The MANAWATU DAILY Times SATURDAY, MARCH 28, 1936. A Franco-German Deadlock

Manawatu Times, Volume 61, Issue 74, 28 March 1936, Page 4

The MANAWATU DAILY Times SATURDAY, MARCH 28, 1936. A Franco-German Deadlock

The past week has seen produced a, spate of speeches from the leaders and Foreign Ministers of European Powers, birt of actual progress in negotiation there is little to record, flic present situation amounts to a Franco-German deadlock. To clarify the situation now existing, a recapitulation of events since the crisis arose may be given. Germany occupied the demilitarised Rhineland with military forces, at the same time offering a 25-year peace pact to her neighbours on both the Eastern and Western frontiers. France and Belgium protested at Germany’s breach of the existing Locarno Treaty. The League of .Nations’ Council sat in London lo determine whether Germany had broken tlie Treaty. By unanimous vote, Germany’s action was condemned as a Treaty breach. Germany claimed that the Franco-Russiun Pact, in her view a military alliance, entitled her to re-oecupy tiic lihincland for self-protective purposes. Furthermore, that her doing so, under these circumstances, did not truly constitute a breach of the Locarno spirit. Whilst this is considered to be a strong cause of Germany's action, there was undoubtedly another cause. That was: Germany wanted to remove the last vestige of foreign control over her. Following the London conference of League Powers, Germany has been almost entreated to make some concession, so as to promote a more conciliatory spirit. Then was born, in London, the suggestion that British and Italian-troops should be stationed along the Franco-German frontier. The French looked coldly upon this suggestion, and it was expected that the Germans would do likewise. This proposal is now regarded as dead. Further suggestions were that Germany should withdraw some, or all, of her forces from the Rhineland. To this, Hitler rejilied that that was impossible unless French forces were withdrawn to an equal degree. France would not be agreeable to this. Germany was then asked to agree not to fortify her re-occupied territory. She cannot be expected to agree to this, as France and Belgium have most powerful fortifications along their side of the frontier. Reduced to its simplest terms, the present European crisis has been occasioned by Germany’s assertion of complete and untrammelled sovereignty within the borders of her territory. She claims the same rights as are exercised by other nations of Europe, whether large or small—the right to do within her borders all that France regards as her right to do within the borders of France. Her claim is so logical as to be difficult to refute. France calculates, by her protests, to draw Britain into a definite military alliance—to re-erect the 1914 Entente Cordiale. In the present state of British public opinion, it is unlikely that Britain would so commit herself. Failing this achievement, French protests will be of no avail. Her only alternative would be to go to war with Germany and compel that State to withdraw her troops from the Rhine. That contingency is extremely unlikely. France would not fight on this case unless Britain would fight with her. Britain would unquestionably support France were she attacked, but one cannot envisage Britain encouraging France to draw the sword in the present circumstances. During the coming few weeks, France will continue to buzz angrily, Germany will yield nothing tangible, Britain will exert every endeavour to compose the quarrel, and finally the whole affair will die down. Our attention will again be turned to the almost-forgotten Italo-Abyssinian conflict, or some fresh “crisis” will loom up, perhaps in Russo-Japanese relationship.

Telephone users are increasing in London, where there are now 250 exchanges, about 10,000 call offices, and a total telephone staff of 10,900 k

Every Frenchman who fell in the Great War is to be named in a “Golden Book”; it will include more than 1,500,000 names and fill 120 .volumes*