The New Zealand Times. MONDAY, AUGUST 21, 1922. TO AVOID RUPTURE

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIX, Issue 11294, 21 August 1922, Page 4

The New Zealand Times. MONDAY, AUGUST 21, 1922. TO AVOID RUPTURE

The good news comes from Paris that there are increasingly strong hopes that a compromise on the proposed moratorium for Germany will eventually be reached, though on lines totally different from those discussed at the London Conference. The Reparations Commission very wisely delayed its meeting of set purpose until the feverish atmosphere that prevailed at the Conference died away; and the Commissioners are now, we are told, making every effort to avoid an AngloFrenoh rupture, which a direot vote for or against the moratorium might produce. As the position stands at present, a great deal hinges upon the attitude/that may be adopted by Belgium. It is, therefore, moot reassuring to learn that the Belgian Cabinet, after hearing M. 'theunis and M. Jaspar, the delegates to the London Conference, congratulated them on their efforts to preserve the Entente, agreeing that its maintenance is the v«ry core of Belgium’e policy. The Reparations Commissioners, it is understood, are considering several compromise plans which, while avoiding a rupture, would yield more and he productive of the pledges, or guarantees, demanded by M. Poincare. Germany will first be Invited to offer acceptable guarantees voluntarily in order to save herself financially; while it is believed that an authorised German Cabinet Minister will be heard by the Commission before it arrives at its decision. So far, so good. On the other hand, however, it is reported by the Paris correspondent of the “Daily Mail” that M. Poincare is stated to have a definite assurance that Belgium will, at the meeting of the Reparations Commission, vote against the moratorium. Moreover, he adds, should Belgium vote against France, which is held to be improbable, JI. Dubois, the French representative, has been instructed to resign; and a deadlock, therefore, appears most likely. We refuse to believe, however, that France would push matters so far as that. Nor does it seem credible that, with several compromise plans already before it, the Reparations Commission, iff France proved to be so absolutely misleading, would find itself unable to avoid a direct issue and avert a final break. The Commissioners have hitherto piloted their barque with consummate discretion and skill, keeping clear of Scylla on the one hand and of Charybdis on the other; and we hope and believe that on this occasion also neither nerve nor eye nor hand will fail them. It is reported, it is true, that France has plans for independent action; that Cabinet has approved these plans; and that M. Poincare is to disclose them when the Commission has finished its discussion and the oft-predicted deadlock has been reached. Plans for independent action arc doubtless in existence. They are, indeed, said to include the seizure of all Gorman taxes and revenue in the occupied territory

held by Fremcli troops, and the sequestration of the P.uhr mines and of certain State iiorests. But France knows the great v.ulue of the Entente. She knows, none’ better, that but for the Entente she would now be prostrate under the iron heel of Germany; and while France may be prepared to go to great lengtihs by way of putting up a big bluff in order to wring the utmost possible in the way of reparations from Germany, she is hardly likely to go so far as to put herself entirely out of court, brook up the Entente, and forfeit the gocidwill, not only of all her Allies, but of the neutral nations as well. It is interesting to note that Mr J. R. Olynes, M.P., threw out at the recent meeting of the General Workers’ Union the suggestion that the League of Nations, with Germany as a member, should he called on to try new settlement plains; and that if the League reached no agreement, America should he asked to arbitrate. Germany, of course, is not yet a member of the League. Hut a session of the Council of the League is shortly to be held in London, and the British representative ok this occasion is to be the Acting-Foreign Secretary, the Earl of Balfour (formerly the Right Hon. A. J. Balfour), who, by his tact, foresightedness, and diplomacy, contributed so markedly to the success of the Washington Conference. Germany, so far, as “a diplomatic correspondent” of the London ‘’‘-Daily Telegraph” points out, has not even submitted her candidature for membership of the League. She would probably, however, hasten to do so if "she saw that that would ten<l towards a peaceful solution of the reparations problem, and make for the stabilisation of her position—economic, political, and social. For Germany, we take it, is in no position to-day to meet France by force of arms; nor can she afford to allow the serious risk of utter social upheaval to continue any longer than is absolutely unavoidable. The statement made hy Dr Wirth, German Chancellor and Minister for Foreign Affairs, seems quite conclusive on that head. Doubtless Germany’s admission to the League would be conditional upon her strict observance of her obligations within the limits of her capacity to make reparations; and the League would also, by admitting her to membership, assume a measure of responsibility for seeing that the requirements as to German disarmament, whether those stipulated by the Treaty of Versailles or the standards laid down by the Special Armaments Sub-commit-tee of the League, were faithfully carried out. But it should, in addition, we hold, be conditional upon the United States also joining the League of Nations. We note that some political circles in France are hoping that the Reparations Commission will reach a deadlock similar to that which resulted at the London Conference, in order to force a further conference in November, if possible including the United States* when the whole problem of reparations and inter-Allied debts could be discussed and settled. The need for a stable settlement in regard to these issues becomes more apparent as time goes on, and as failure follows failure. The alternative that confronts the world is so terrible that it is unthinkable that the endeavours to avert it will be allowed to fail. Each successive failure to secure adjustment bu* emphasises the more the imperative need for a settlement. Here we again quote as emphasising this point, Mr Massey, who declared, in his Budget speech: “The inevitable conclusion has been forced upon the various Governments that the reparations question can no longer be satisfactorily dealt with apart from the general economic position of the world, and that international action is necessary for reconstruction in Russia and Central Europe.” America, surely, must ultimately come round to this point of view. The suggestion that, if the Reparations Commission fails to achieve a settlement, Fiance and Germany should settle their differences privately, is too absurd to be taken seriously. Manifestly, if there were the remotest possibility of France and Germany coining to an amicable arrangement in that way, there would he very little difficulty in the Reparations Commission solving the problem. Further, the throwing in of Soviet Russia as a make-weight would hardly he likely to help France and Germany to com© to an understanding.