PEACE PACTS

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXX, 12 March 1936, Page 7

PEACE PACTS

PROPOSALS BY HITLER DIRECT DEALINGS BETWEEN GOVERNMENTS INTERVIEW WITH PRESS CORRESPONDENT (United Preßs Association —By Electric Telegraph—Copy right i (Received 12th March, 8.30 a.m. LONDON. 10th March. “My proposal for the conclusion of non-aggression pacts on the east and west of Germany applies equally to Czechoslovakia and Austria.” said Herr Hiller in an interview With Mr Ward Price, the "Daily Mail” correspondent, at Munich. Herr Hitler continued: “My proposal was meant to be universal and without exception. My feeling is that pacts are more efficiently negotiated by direct dealings between the Governments coin cerned. Germany, however, will certainly be only too glad if other Powers for instance, Britain, come forward as ‘honest brokers’ with practical propositions for solutions of these matters.” Answering a question as to whether Germany was prepared to maintain her offer until after the French elections, Herr Hitler said: “There is no reason to fix a time limit, hut if the proposals, like so many preceding ones, are rejected or ignored, the German Government will not importune Europe with further overtures.”

Asked whether he would voluntarily limit the Rhineland troops to a force manifestly insufficient for offensive action against France, Herr Hitler replied that there could be no question of a concentration for offensive purposes because Germany had no further claims to make from France nor would she make any. Moreover, the task for tlie future was to see that neither France nor Germany felt herself threatened.

Mr Ward Price suggested that had Herr Hitler made his proposals first and demanded demilitarisation as a counterpart tlie world would have accepted with enthusiasm. Regarding the fate of his offer to limit the German army to 300,000 men, Herr Hitler said: “I daresay the proposals iri that form would have received the world’s approval, but I don’t believe they would ever have reached the conference table. It is not possible for one party to a treaty to transgress its sense and letter without the other party in consequence liberating himself from his engagements. what I have done.”

He added that he believed that French and British statesmen in similar circumstances would act similarly. “The verdict of posterity will not con* test that. It is more honourable to end n, state of intolerable tension in order to clear the way for a development desired by the whole world rather than to maintain an unbearable state ■,of affairs. I believe that if the proposals are accepted it will later be realised that thev have rendered a great service to Europe and the cause of peace. FRANK ADMISSION Dr. Goebbels, Minister of Propaganda, in an election address, frankly declared that Germany knew she was breaking the Versailles Treaty when she began’ building up armaments, hut she did so because other signatories to the Treaty had not disarmed. Germany did not want to destroy the bridges with France, hut 60,000,000 people could not be treated like pariahs. “M. Sarraut said it was not possible to sign treaties with Germany because she has broken previous treaties,” he said, “but we shall keep all sane and reasonable pacts. The reoccupation of the Rhineland was a deed to repair Germany’s sovereignty and honour and reconstruct European peace. “Our reasons for leaving the League have been obliterated bv what we have since done, but we shall ask, after our return to the League, that the colonial question he solved and the League divorced from tlie Versailles Treaty. We want no compromise but definite and lasting treaties. The world must accept the Fulmer's proposal. There is no other solution to re-establish national and economic recovery in Europe.”

MOBILISATION MEASURES

NOT BEING CONSIDERED BY FRANCE PRESENT PRECAUTION SUFFICIENT (Received 12th March, 10.10 a.in.) PARIS, 11th March. The War Minister, Mr Maiirin, denies that measures for mobilisation are being considered. The present precaution of placing frontier forces on an alarm footing is considered sufficient.

DANGER EMPHASISED

BRITISH AND FRENCH ESTRANGEMENT

FIRM ATTITUDE TOWARDS GERMANY URGED

(Received 12th March, 10.10 a.m.) LONDON, lltli March. Hie ‘‘Manchester Guardian’s” diplomatic correspondent emphasises the clanger of British and French estrangement, pointing out that if allowed to develop it would compel France to consolidate her Continental alliances and renew her military agreement with Italy ami act to tlie utmost to force a decision before Germany has completed rearmament.

France and her allies see themselves in mortal danger. Feeling on the Com tinent, the strength of which impressed Mr Eden, is that if Hitler is allowed to get away with it, the annexation of Austria and the partition of Czechoslovakia is only a matter of time. Hitler fears British and French co-operation most of all. It must be made clear to Germany that the only alternative to the withdrawal of troops from the Rhineland and tlie commencement of negotiations on the basis of the status quo is the defensive “encirclement” of Germany.

DEMAND BY FRANCE

RETURN TO STATUS QUO

WITHDRAWAL OF ALL TROOPS

(Received 12th March, 9.20 a.m.) PARIS, 11th •March. An official communique categorically denies “press reports that France would accept as a solution of the dispute provoked by tlie German denunciation of Locarno and the reoecupation of the demilitarised zone, that the number of sol diers installed on the banks of the Rhine should he limited and that no for tifications he built in the zone.” This means that France is determined to demand a return to tlie status quo, including the withdrawal of all troops in the Rhineland,