NOTES AND COMMENTS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXX, Issue 21579, 25 August 1933, Page 10

NOTES AND COMMENTS

LIVE AND LET LIVE An editorial article in the Times Trade and Engineering Supplement concludes as follows:—Tho great fundamental truth is that only prosperous nations breed good customers; in international relationships the con verso is also truo that no nation can permanently prosper at the expense of its neighbours. Tho origin of all trade was tho desire to confer and to obtain mutual advantage. The old maxim, "Live and let live," applies to modern commerce between nations. Britain has been foremost in encouraging the development and advancement of all nations; it has helped the weak and raised the fallen and has prospered in so doing. Now it has a right to insist that others shall follow its examplo if thev wish to belong to the group which is destined to rebuild tho world's fortunes. Men of affairs do not ask our statesmen to follow a policy of selfish exclusivcness, but they have a right to expect that the advantages of trading with tho British Empire on a fair and equitable basis shall bo reciprocated.

THE EMPIRE'S EXAMPLE " You have come at a time of considerable difficulty and anxiety," said Viscount Cecil, in addressing a group of Canadian authors during their tour of Britain. " Patriotism is a splendid thing, and eveu nationalism is a fine sentiment to a certain degree, but national egotism, tho conception that all duty is to seek the advantago of the State to which one belongs, is a most dangerous sentiment. We belong to tho British Empire—a great organisation made up of the great territories and self-governing Dominions now admitted by all to bo sovereign and independent countries, joined together not solely by material bonds, but by common culturo and aspiration. Selfinterest divides people. Self-sacrifice brings them together. What then is our duty in the world? It is nofc to be satisfied with ourselves as separate nations or as an Empire, but rather to do our best to promote tho prosperity of tho world by exertions, and by example. It is the duty of the Empire to save herself by her exertions, and to savo tho wholo of humanity by her example."

IMPERIAL DEFENCE Admiral Sir Herbert Richmond addressed tlio Royal Empire Society's summer school on " Imperial Strategy, keeping tho subject within technical bounds. Ho said that in Imperial defence the principle of securing all the individual territories against invasion ■was an entirely mistaken one. They should begin by concentrating upon the safety of their communications and the other would then follow. On this point it must bo remembered that a smaller navy than one's own could gravely injure communications; for a much larger navy was required for defence than for attack, although to carry out an invasion it was necessary to have a navy superior to that of the enemy. Ho thought it was important for the scattered Dominions to realise that, even if they were to devoto tho utmost they could afford to land defence against invasion, they would not strengthen their security but weaken it, because the money thus spent would bo taken away from the sea forco which protected communications and which alone could maintain the security of the Empire. There wero two opposing views on this question of Imperial defence. One was that tho defenco of the Empire should bo considered as a whole. The other viow was that each unit of the Empiro should consider its own individual dangers and provide such forces as it could to secure it against them; a system of Imperial defence would then concern itself with co-ordinating theso various units. Ho believed that this second view was entirely wrong because it produced a local outlook. They could not have economy of effort without unity of effort, and unity of effort was impossible without unity of aim. Tho problem of defence should, therefore, be regarded as a whole and tho peoples of tho Empiro brought to realise their community of interest.

NO VALUE IN GESTURE Many people failed to realise liow greatly tho situation Lad changed sinco 191-1, continued Admiral Sir Herbert Richmond. Their naval superiority had been built up through long years of effort, and once acquired it was not very difficult to maintain. Moreover, trailo was flourishing, and it was therefore possible for Britain to bear the burden of naval upkeep without asking tho Dominions to do more than contribute a portion for their local defence. It was now necessary, however, to look ahead and to consider that it would not he so very many years before tho population of the overseas Dominions outstripped their own. In tho meantime, they must create a real understanding of the problem before people's minds became too crystallised. Once they had been overtaken in naval power it was very difficult to recover what they had lost, for if they tried to re-establish their superiority by building more ships others were free to do tho same. In answer to a subsequent question, Sir Herbert Richmond said: —" I am not at all averse to our leading tho way in disarmament, but 1 am very much averse to our disarming when tho other nations do not, and to tho idea that they should be left with sufficient forces to bring us to our knees if the international machinery happens not to work. I do not think there is any value at all in what is called a gesture."