THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 1937 GERMANY AND MANDATES

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIV, Issue 22877, 4 November 1937, Page 10

THE New Zealand Herald AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 1937 GERMANY AND MANDATES

The firm tone of Mr. Eden's speech on the question of returning to Germany the colonies lost by her in the Great War has apparently aroused a sharp reaction in Germany and Italy. Circumstantially it is said that Germany is resolved to present an immediate demand for the return |of some if not all of them. One j report says that the demand will be i based on now grounds, a phrase that seems rather to mean that it will be presented by new process, j Two of the four Powers that jointly took over the German colonies—so the new plan of action is explained ! —will express a wish that the ! arrangement be revised. Concerning this suggested procedure, it must be said at once that, as a beginning, it accords with the necessities of the position, if there is meant an appeal to the Principal Allied and Associated Powers, which allotted the ex-enemy colonies to mandatory States and still hold the right to initiate any different distribution. Mr. Chamberlain, some time ago, when speaking just as firmly as Mr. Eden has since done, mentioned the need to have the approval of the mandatories, the transferees and the Council of the League of Nations : but it is clear that the last-named body, entrusted only with surveillance on behalf of the Allied and Associated Powers, has at the most nothing- more than an advisor}* function with reference to the capabilities of any suggested trans- j j feree, and certainly no control of i ' re-allotment. The statement that j Herr Hitler will contest the validity of the colonial mandates granted to the League of Nations is in error; the League holds no colonial mandates, and has plainly said so when approached on the subject. It is significant that Articles 119 to 127 of the Versailles Treaty, the validity of which Herr Hitler is said to be about to contest, provide expressly, at their outset, that "Germany renounces in favour of the Principal Allied and Associated Powers all her rights and titles over her overseas possessions." If they had since renounced these rights and titles in favour of the League an appeal to it would be in order. They have not done so.

According to the news available, the intended German procedure is to use as intermediaries "two of the four Powers that jointly took over the German colonies," and the only reasonable meaning is that these four are, for the purposes of this approach, the British Empire, I France, Italy and Japan. It should be noted that four of the Allied , Powers were given mandates over j these colonies—the British Empire, I France, Belgium and Japan; and i that the apportioning of Turkey's lost possessions was similarly | done at the San Remo Conj ference in 1920. Now it is reported ; that, on Germany's behalf, Italy ! and Japan are to approach the i British Empire and France with a i request for a re-allotment in conformity with the German demand. An interesting point arises, therefore : what precisely is Japan prepared to do? Italy, although gaining by the war a considerable slice of adjacent territory, was given no mandate over any ex-German colonial possession, and consequently has none to put into the pool for re-allotment. But Japan's case is vastly different. She received Germany's islands in the Pacificnorth of the equator —the Caroline, Marshall and Mariana (also called Ladrone) groups—altogether an extensive and important accession ; and she regards control of them as vital. When she notified her withdrawal from the League she announced, in anticipation of any raising of a doubt whether as a nonmember she would remain qualified for the mandate, that she meant to retain control; and she said, in effect, that if other Powers objected they had better try to take the | islands from her and see what would happen. Depend upon it, there will not be the slightest readiness on Japan's part to give up anything. Very well, what logical objection can she raise to declarations made by Great Britain, France, Belgium, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand that they are not prepared to surrender their mandates? Japan will be a very vulnerable emissary | for Germany. I If Germany should cease to vociferate demands, in a spirit of ! truculence instancing the growth of ! an evil that is obstructively preva- | lent, and instead return to the international round table with a case reasonably prepared and presented, there could be discussion entirely amicable. That she bolted from the Disarmament Conference and the League immediately their pledges of "equality of status and treatment in all respects had been solemnly given was indicative of a rooted resolve to avoid such discussion and to cling to grievances as a vita' element in an aggressive national policy. This method pervades her conduct on this colonial question, in tacit acknowledgment of the weakness of her case. How weak it is, in reference to emigration figures, economic needs and strategic requirements, has often been shown. Even so, there has been sufficient readiness, memorably expressed at Geneva by Sir Samuel Hoare for Britain and reiterated in many quarters since, to welcome all she can advance in justification of her demands—sufficient to encourage an exact and complete submission of facts. Preferring not to respond in this way, she has herself hampered review. Unhappily, she has a colonial reputation that is undeniably damaging. To Mr. Chamberlain's list of those to be consulted must be added the native peoples in the mandated territories, peoples that do not forget and after all these years of another regime are entitled to say what they wish for their own future.