WAR THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXX, 22 June 1936, Page 5

WAR THE ONLY ALTERNATIVE

WHY SANCTIONS POLICY WAS DROPPED MR STANLEY BALDWIN EXPLAINS REPLY TO CRITICISM IN THE COMMONS WARNING TO DICTATORS (United Press Association—by Electric Telegraph—Copyright)

LONDON, 20th June. Addressing several thousand Unionists at Wishaw, Lanarkshire, the Prime Minister (Mr Stanley Baldwin) declared the Government thought it right to drop the policy of sanctions because it did not believe its continuance, even if all nations desired it, could be useful or effective. He pointed out that sanctions had been introduced in order to stop the war; they were not punitive. “The only way of altering events which already have occurred is to go to war,” said Mr Baldwin. “I do not know of a single country in Europe prepared to go to war. I should not vote for such action.” Mr Baldwin then examined the Labour manifesto, against which he quoted extracts from his own speeches before, during and after the general election, for the purpose of proving that the Government had not, as Labour alleged, misled the nation by scrapping its pledges. He first denied that the Government was abandoning the League, and then recalled a speech last year in which he pointed out that if the League fell short of its friends’ hopes their desire would be to strengthen its weak spots, and he added, “This is exactly what we are going to do.” He recalled the reference that sanctions might easily lead to war, adding it would surely be the most bitter and cruel irony of history if the League, in attempting to enforce peace in a localised area, only set fire to the world, starting a war which might run from Pole to Pole.

Referring to oil sanctions, he emphasised that they could not be enforced owing to the enormous quantities coming from the United States, which there was no reason to believe would prohibit exportation. After further quotations dealing with the necessity of collective security, Mr Baldwin declared that if the League had remained a League of all nations the present situation would not have arisen, because the strength against an aggressor would have made the aggression not worth while. Referring to the Labour manifesto demanding a stop to the drift to war, Mr Baldwin said if there was one way of drifting to war it was to talk about applying sanctions and then to do nothing to encourage the recruiting of the men necessary to work the searchlights for anti-aircraft guns.

“If Britain were ever again raided we would be abused by our opponents, including Mr Lloyd George, because we had scuttled. Those words mean nothing less than that we ran away from the Italian navy; that we ran away from war. People lightly say that and vote against every aeroplane for the Air Force, every proposal for an extra shell for the navy. The thing seems too fatuous unless there is no limit to such political fatuity.

“We are making an effort, despite the talk regarding loss of prestige, to keep Britain from the perils and horrors of a modern war in Europe,” said Mr Baldwin. “We shall try and obtain collective security. If Japan, America and Germany enter the League it would be workable to-morrow, but the nation must not underrate risks. If it will not face danger for the sake of security it must say so. You cannot have security, collective or otherwise, on a cheap or second-hand or any other system of limited liability. Nevertheless we must not surrender the hope of the nations rejoining the League, also that some form of disarmament may be practicable.

“Moreover, however perilous the future may be, whatever ambitions are locked up in the breasts of dictators, they must know that another war in Europe would end civilisation and might lead to a revolt of the peoples against their leaders until Europe was in a condition of completely barbarous anarchy.

“I hope that one result of the agitation the Labourites are attempting to stir up will be educative, because I tremble to think of the result if when in power they tackle these problems with the lack of knowledge and understanding and levity which they exhibit to-day in Parliament and elsewhere.

“I have nothing to apologise for. We are keeping our course and even now are considering how to take up these matters in the autumn at Geneva, and I await with equanimity and confidence the result of any campaign undertaken to weaken our hands.”

Last week the British Parliamentary

Labour Party issued a manifesto drawing attention to the grave danger to the League owing to the abandonment of sanctions and accusing the Government of scrapping its solemn pledges that the League would remain the keystone of its foreign policy. The manifesto added that the Government was not only prepared to allow Signor Mussolini to profit by aggression but also to abandon the whole system of collective security through the League. The manifesto emphasised that the crisis should be used as an opportunity to rehabilitate the League and make an approach to peace by rallying in defence of collective security.

SURRENDER TO AGRESSOR LIBERAL PARTY’S RESOLUTION HUMILIATION AND INDIGNATION LONDON, 20th June. Two thousand delegates at the Liberal Party convention passed a resolution condemning with a deep sense of humiliation and indignation the Government’s surrender to an aggressor, and the betrayal of the League, and reaffirming loyalty to the League also urging Liberal organisations t 6 rouse the national conscience A group of Government supporters, headed by Brigadier-General E. L. Spears tabled an amendment to the Labour vote of censure, urging the Government not to condone Italian aggression and also to prevent Italy raising credits in Britain as the price of bbtaining Italian cooperation in Europe.

RESUMPTION OF TRADE BRITISH GOVERNMENT PREPARING LONDON, 20th June. The “Daily Telegraph’s” diplomatic correspondent says the British Government is preparing to resume trade with Italy when sanctions are lifted, which will probably be in the middle of July. If an agreement is reached at Geneva on 26th June the Co-ordination Committee will probably fix the date for common action for general withdrawal.

ATTITUDE OF FRANCE AMENDMENT NOT APPROVED (Received 22nd June, 9.20 a.m.) PARIS, 21st June. It is understood that the Government will not consider it is essential to amend the Covenant, which is a slow business, and prefers the strengthening of Article XI abolishing the unanimity clause, and excluding the parties concerned when setting international machinery in motion also that economic sanctions should not be introduced unless the Powers are prepared to use military ;anctions. These suggestions are Doing made to foreign governments.