THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS WEDNESDAY, JULY 22, 1931. A CRUCIAL CONFERENCE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVIII, Issue 20931, 22 July 1931, Page 8

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS WEDNESDAY, JULY 22, 1931. A CRUCIAL CONFERENCE.

It is said that the hearing at the Hague of. the Austro-Gcrman customs union case is completely overshadowed by the Seven Powers Conference in London. The comment has a significance- far beyond its suggestion of a swing of interest from one current event to another. There has happened since the proposing of tariff reciprocity between Austria and Germany something of wider and more critical importance. That proposal became at once the subject of bitter controversy between France and Germany and a matter for grave consideration by the League Council, but the scope of its provocative influence was relatively narrow. The Hoover moratorium, on the contrary, while it had an immediate motive in the financial plight of Germany, was at once a concern of all the civilised world. Its discussion involved, at one stage, the Austro-Gorman union, and may do so again, yet this earlier inclusion treated the union as a mere item in a national policy, whereas the London conference must gather into its thought the varied although similar anxieties of many peoples. Mr. Mac Donald has not overstated these anxieties in his description of the meeting of the conference as one of the turning points in history. Should the conference fail, there will ensue a cumulation of perils; should it succeed, it will do more than demonstrate the value of international cooperation—it will begin a more hopeful economic and political era. Before it is a great task. The Hoover proposals, in spite of their attractiveness, in spite even of the general welcome they have met, have evoked questions beset with difficulty, longstanding questions some of them and charged with inflammable elements. All the old fears and suspicions entertained by France, to look no further, are active again ; there are issues at stake vital to the welfare of all the nations represented, and of others looking on.

Determined efforts have been made to confine the discussions within safe limits. France has insisted that only Germany's financial crisis shall be discussed, and an announcement has been made £hat this condition of French participation has been accepted by the other participants. This announcement, however, has no official basis. The British Government has openly desired that much more shall be considered, in an endeavour to seize a great opportunity to deal with the whole economic problem now vexing the world. There may be reasonably ventured the opinion that the conference will find itself facing questions of much wider import than the need of Germany and the best way to meet it in conformity with the moratorium proposals. Mr. Mac Donald, according to the communique issued at the close of the initial session, has given a lead that will take the conference far beyond the limits named by France. He has even brought into view the political perils entailed by the possible failure to solve the economic problem. This widening of the discussions is practically inevitable. France herself will be , sorely tempted, as hitherto, to raise the political aspect. What she did in reference to the customs union scheme is instructive. Germany asserted its innocuous nature as merely a commercial project. France, prone to think every bush an officer, raised an alarm of German militancy. Hence the action of the League Council in sending the question for judicial opinion—to take it out of the arena of Franco-German conflict. • Is it now probable that France will leave unuttered her apprehension that financial relief will be used by Germany for militant ends? . Is the second "pocket" battleship likely to go unmentioned? What has already transpired, in the assurances sought and given about the use of relief for economic purposes only, so far from closing that subject, suggests that there may be an insistence by France on their full and formal repetition at the conference. Thus even the political aspects will probably have to be faced.

In the presence of the United States Secretary of State at the conference is a fact supporting what has been announced about the limiting of the discussions to the financial and economic problems, for it would be contrary to American principles to take official part in parleys mainly or even incidentally concerning European politics. It was at first expected that Mr. Stimson, if present at all, would attend merely as an "observer." Possibly he has reserved the right to withdraw should political issues be raised or at least to be regarded temporarily as a non-participant. But whatever the nature of the understanding, as to the scope of the conference or the measure of American co-operation in it, a strikingly unusual departure has been made in American practice. Hitherto, in international gatherings where heads or official representatives of Governments, including the American, have decided momentous issues, the subjects of discussion have been, as a rule, rigidly defined, excluding those mainly of European arising. The peace conference, with its founding of the League of Nations, was markedly exceptional—as the occasion demanded—and the United States, as soon as possible, repudiated the participation by refusing to ratify what was done. In this in-, stance, with very momentous issues of European politics in the offing, there is American co-operation. As the conference proceeds, considerable interest will attach to Mr. Stiinson's shai*e. It cannot be small.. It may be decisive. May it not be the beginning of a more responsible and really philanthropic sharing of European burdens by American statesmanship 1