Nelson Evening Mail SATURDAY. JUNE 13, 1942 UNITED NATIONS’ DAY

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume 77, 13 June 1942, Page 4

Nelson Evening Mail SATURDAY. JUNE 13, 1942 UNITED NATIONS’ DAY

TO-MORROW the people of Great Britain and the United States will join in honouring the flags of those nations which are associated in the struggle for freedom. The proposal came in the first place from America, where 14th June has for many years been kept as a day for honouring the national flag as the symbol of freedom, strength and unity. This year President Roosevelt has suggested that the custom should be extended to include the flags of ail the United Nations; and the people of the British Empire have expressed a wish to be associated with the celebrations. The date chosen is singularly appropriate; for it is two years this month since the collapse of France left Britain to face the storm alone, almost exactly a year since we received our first big accession of strength with the entry of Russia into the wdr, and six months since the attack on Pearl Harbour brought in the United States and made China a close ally. In New Zealand the celebrations are being held to-day. The flags of the United Nations fly on public buildings, and in the larger centres there are parades of all three Services on a scale hitherto unparalleled in this country. The procession in Wellington is expected to stretch over a distance of twenty miles, and modern vehicles and weapons are on display in large numbers. The functions that are being held will serve a double purpose; besides honouring our Allies,, they will show that Ne\v Zealand is in a far better position to resist attack than is generally realised. In Nelson, unfortunately, there is no public function, and we must observe the day vicariously. Celebrations of this kind serve tc focuss public attention on ideas that are usually vague and incoherent, thus leading us to take stock of what is going on around us. Three lines of thought suggest themselves. The first is that the term “United Nations” should represent something more than a platitudinous phrase Full accord among the members ol an alliance is always hard to achieve, especially with elements so diverse as the British, the Americans, the Chinese and the Russians, and it is obvious that the democratic Powers do not always see eye to eye. Bul we should not exaggerate the significance of these differences oi opinion. In general it may be said that the United Nations are working together harmoniously, and their alliance rests upon a much firmer basis than that of the Teuton bully, the Italian lackey, and the Oriental miscreant. The British-Soviet treaty means a further strengthening of the united front as well as provision of a foundation for the postwar edifice of international cooperation. In the second place we should be on our guard against premature optimism. The war news recently has been good, but the danger is still acute. In the Burma-China area, the position is unfavourable; on the other fronts we may claim to have halted the aggressor, but our margin of advantage is nowhere considerable. With our inexhaustible resources we are justified in expecting ultimate victory; but we need time to mobilise our men and materials, and in the interim an enemy victory on

any of the six or seven fronts, a major error in our strategy or even a stroke of bad luck might weight the scales against us. It is a fault of the Englishman to be careless of danger until it is actually upon him, and to forget it as soon as it is past. The last year has given us reason for confidence, but it is far too soon for us to relax our efforts. In the third place we must remember that i the union of the democracies has a dual purpose—to Win the war first, and to make a better world afterwards. It may seem premature to consider the second problem when the first is still far from solution, but it is well to look a Jong way ahead. The peace arrangements of 1918-19 have been harshly criticised by the victors as well as the vanquished, and their faults were due largely to the hasty manner in which they were made by statesmen who had waged war successfully, but had not had time to consider the problems of peace. The brave new world that we hope to see after the war cannot be created extempore. The responsibility for introducing. it will rest upon the United Nations; and it is desirable that, while the energies of most statesmen in the democracies will be bent on the successful prosecution of the war, some among them should also be prepar-