THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 1936 QUESTIONS FOR GERMANY

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22404, 28 April 1936, Page 10

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS TUESDAY, APRIL 28, 1936 QUESTIONS FOR GERMANY

What is beirg called a questionnaire is to be put to Herr Hitler, in the hope of finding out Germany's wishes and intentions. The British Foreign Minister and the staff of the Foreign Office are busily employed in preparing the questions, giving attention to some suggested by France. Presumably the British Government will take the role of questioner. Resort to this method is interesting. It may be effective in eliciting a clear and final statement of Germany's foreign policy, or it may not. Everything depends on the reception accorded the inquiries. So far, there has been embarrassingly lacking a candid and unequivocal mnouncement of what Germany wants and is prepared to accept in final redress of alleged grievances. C n a famous occasion Sir John Simon and Mr. Eden, as official representatives of their country's Government, went to Berlin on a quest for sucli information —and they came away -with little or nothing for their pains. Pressed in the House of Commons for an account of their embassy, Sir Jo in Simon was unable to report any suicess, and an impression persists that as a fishing expedition the visit was a complete failure, whatever of conviviality was enjoyed. Herr Hitler and his henchmen had reason to feel flattered at the attention paid thorn, but the anxieties of Europe were no whit eased. That episode is worth recall, as is the sequence of events leading to the exploratory visit. Nobody outside Germany, and few within, could then tell from Herr Hitler's public utterances whether he wao for peace or war, for friendly co-operation or unfriendly obstruction, and it was important to fi:id out. The position today is worse, and the need to know Germany's mind sll the greater, but there is reason to suspect that frankness will not be iaore readily forthcoming. That has never been Herr Hitler's way, except in talking to the German people, and his real attitude in foreign affairs may be still difficult to (tiscover. He may not object absolutely to the inquisition, but his answers are not likely to be either direct or binding. The laboui's of the Foreign Office, therefore, cannot be optimistically viewed. However, the questions understood to be in preparation are apparently designed to elicit vital information. First is a query as to Germany's policy concerning the independence of Austria, Danzig and Memel. Unluss the Nazi purpose of attaching Austria to the Reich, by fair means or foul—a purpose declaredly second to none cherished by the Nazi Government —be entirely abandoned, there ought to be no lessening of suspicion about German good faith. On the freedom of Austria from foreign domination, whether German or Italian, depends largely the peace oE Europe. As to Danzig and Memel, the present status of each under League surveillance remains essential; Germany's desire to resume territorial control eastward ought not to be allowed to outweigh other national interests in that region. There will be an intensifying of international friction in eastern Europe if, at this juncture, the German demands be 1 conceded. Other questions relate to this grave risk. Does Herr Hitler insist on a revision of the League Covenant as a condition precedent to Germany's resumption of membership? Only a negative answer can be of service, and thi3 sort of answer is unlikely. It may be possible to renew certain national assurances of readiness to undertake revision—they have been sincerely given before, when the only outcome was Germany's churlish refusal to accept them as a basis of continued collaboration—but to allow Germany to dictate the details of revision as an imperious outsider would be ridiculous. The League has suffered setbacks enough; its becoming an appanage of Germany would be the last blow. To ask Herr Hitler to join in a pact limiting air forces on Germany's ■ western frontier and to consent to pacts of mutual assistance by her eastern neighbours is to put proposals certain of rejection when considered together. The first may suit his present policy, for he evidently is now more concerned about eastern advantage than western security, but as a condition of accepting possible checks in the east it will be certainly scouted, Thei remaining questions arc equally pertinent—and equally sure of unsatisfactory reply. Is a remilitarised lihineland the last achievement of equality on which Germany is bent? To say so would be obviously untrue, in the light of recent and present claiims. Are the various treaties of non-aggression contemplated by Germany to fall within the framework of the League Covenant as parts of a scheme of real collective security? Again, only a negative answer is consistent with Germany's undisguised intention' of weakening the League, v either by withholding amicable co-operation or by setting up a rival structure of agreements positively inimical to its activity. The so-called questionnaire—really an inquiry as to what Herr Hitler precisely means by his vague offers of open-minded negotiationpromises little of value, unless it should elicit a candid acknowledgment that they mean nothing of that sort.