Will Stalin’s Words Be Translated Into Deeds?

Northern Advocate, 26 September 1946, Page 5

Will Stalin’s Words Be Translated Into Deeds?

The extent to which deterioration in Anglo-Russian relations has created misgivings in Britain is indicated by the warmth with which the British Press, welcomes reassurances given by Marshal Stalin in his interview with Mr Alexander Worth. Every leading daily this morning makes the statement the chief theme of its editorial comment. Coming as it has done on the heels of the urgent . appeal for better understanding made by’Mr Anthony Eden at Watford, and following Mr Henry Wallace's effort to initiate a fresh American approach, it is thought that the Foreign Secretary (Mr Ernest Bevin) may also take a hand in the effort to regain some of th'e ground lost in recent international bickerings. The general tenor of British Press comment is that the statement should be accepted as a genuine effort on the part of Marshal Stalin to promote better understanding, but that a great deal will depend upon whether . or not the views the Russian leader has expressed are translated into Russian policy. At present it is frankly pointed out that it is difficult to reconcile Marshal Stalin’s friendly tone with the hostility of the Russian radio' and Press, and the speeches of MM. Molotov and Gromyko. EVIDENCE WANTED The Daily Telegraph says it would be ungracious to endeavour to pick holes in the declaration, which plainly was made as a contribution towards dissipation of suspicion. The contrast, ; both in tone and substance, with some recent vapourings of the Moscow radio , and with the speeches of Russian re--1 presentatives in Paris is so marked that it would be irresponsible not to note and welcome the change without cautious speculation. | The Manchester Guardian, on the ‘ contrary, does not consider very much

will be gained by making the approach suggested by Mr Eden until the Russians give more concrete evidence of goodwill. Marshal Stalin’s answers to Mr Werth are reassuring but, unfortunately, the speeches of MM. Molotov and Gromyko are hot. The Guardian draws attention to the fact that the whole tone of the Russian radio at the time Marshal Stalin’s statement was issued was antagonistic and abus-. ive ih its references to the Western Fowers, and says it is very difficult to reconcile Marshal Stalin's statements with present Russian policy as expressed to the outside world. Although the general trend of Marshal Stalin’s answers are encouraging, only these will show whether they have the importance some commentators seem to place upon them. PUT TRUST IN WEST The Daily Herald, while it welcomes Marshal Stalin’s assurances, says it is obvious from the marshal’s own words that there is need for closer cultural ties between Britain and the Soviet and that it is also obvious that Marshal Stalin does not realise the completeness cf the Labour Government’s authority in Britain. The Herald expresses the opinion that Marshal Stalin’s view of the origin of war talk is too narrow and emphasises that there are a large number of people in Britain who are not influenced by. propaganda, but who stni are profoundly uneasy about the future of international relationship. “Unless a supreme effort is made at once, things will go from bad to worse,” says the Yorkshire Post. “That has been proved by the bitter experience of the last 12 months, for, as Mr Eden showed, suspicions have a way of becoming facts. . “If Russia wants security there are simple and safe ways of getting it. Let her trust the West and cooperate in Anglo-American endeavours to pro-

(10.30 a.m.) LONDON, Sept. 25. mote world economic recovery, and she will win trust and cooperation from Britain and America in return.” RETURN TO COOPERATION The Glasgow Herald suggests that world reaction to Mr Wallace’s speech may have impressed the Kremlin with the growing distrust of Russian policy and led Marshal Stalin to publish his interview with Mr Werth as a corrective. Something more concrete than Marshal Stalin's reassurances will, however, be required to diminish world apprehension. “The whole declaration,” concludes the Herald, “has an unhappy similarity to pronouncements made by the totalitarian leaders of the not very remote past.” The News Clironrcro —ys Marshal Stalin’s words encourage the hope that a new aproach may be made to AngloSoviet differences. There will be widespread support in Britain for Mr Eden’s appeal to the great powers to return to the spirit of cooperation which animated them throughout the war, and Marshal Stalin’s words, which lend no countenance to hysterical war talk, are a further inducement to attempt the approach. “It is deeds, not words, that ultimately determine the course of events in all countries,” concludes the Chronicle. “Nevertheles, Marshal Stalin’s statement comes at a most opportune moment and should do much to lessen the present tension.” *. SOOTHING DRUG? The Vatican City newspaper, Observatore RGmano, in an editorial, asks whether Marshal Stalin’s dismissal of the danger of war was not an “injection of morphine”? The newspaper notes that the world reacted to the speech with a sense of relief, and recalls similar reaction to Marshal Stalin’s declaration to the As-

i sedated Press earlier in the year, but the crisis returned. “Is not the key to the enigma the fact that nobody really wants war, but nobody trusts anybody else?” asks the paper. Mr Anthony Eden, in a speech to his constituents, said Marshal Stalin’s speech offered a new opportunity for Allied diplomacy. “I am confident the opportunity will be seized,” he said. “There doubt.ltss are many difficulties, but I am confident these can be overcome with perseverance and goodwill.” EISENHOWER REPLIES General Eisenhower, commenting on Marshal Stalin’s reference to the desirability of prompt withdrawal of American troops from China, said there was nothing that could be called an occupation army in China, says Reuter’s correspondent aboard the Queen Mary in mid-Atlantic. General Eisenhower said America had nothing left in China except small detachments. He appealed for a cards to be placed on the table attitude to world problems. “Whatever you say you are doing, you must live up to it 100 per cent,” he said. “You cannot use chicanery and the methods of Metternich and Talleyrandy Marshal Stalin s suggestion that they are delaying demobilisation to prevent the growth of unemployment will sound odd ,to those who-know the relative weakness of the British and American forces compared with the 5,000,000 Russians still under arms. The former Secretary of Commerce (Mr H. A. Wallace) unreservedly hailed Marshal Stalin’s statements, in combination with Mr Eden’s speech. “The statements have brought hope to millions throughout the world who are hungering for peace,” he said.

According to one theory advanced by Washington observers, Marshal Stalin’s statements were directed to the Russian as well as the American people. With the Wallace controversy and the Paris debates whipped to a high pitch, Marshal Stalin found the situation more tense than he originally intended, with neither the Russian nor the American people wanting war, therefore something had to be done to calm nerves. The White House is silent and the Assistant-Secretary of State (Mr W. Clayton), would only say that Marshal Stalin’s statements were interesting and important. He saw no need for a new approach in relations between the Big Four as Mr Eden had suggested. Stating that the Kremlin Sphinx had perhaps spoken more usefully than any other voice in the current uproar, the New York Herald Tribune comments editorially that although the interview carried no final promise of pacification, it suggested that the Kremlin may be groping for a real basis for peace.

The New York Times in a leader says just how important the statement was must depend on future action. Marshal Stalin in Hungary and elsewhere in Central Europe, on the Adriatic. at the Dardanelles, and in the Middle East had plenty of scope to practise “that friendly and lasting cooperation” which he thought “far from decreasing, may even grow.”If there was to be successful cooperation it could not be-exclusively on Russian terms as Marshal Stalin hitherto had wanted it.