THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES THURSDAY, JUNE 19, 1924. FRANCO-GERMAN RELATIONS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19202, 19 June 1924, Page 6

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES THURSDAY, JUNE 19, 1924. FRANCO-GERMAN RELATIONS.

'■ May this memorial be a milestone on the road to freedom and vengeance!'’ These words, uttered by Count Eulenburg at the ceremony of unveiling a war memorial at Potsdam at which the ex-Crown Prince was present, reflect the existence in Germany of a spirit that is, to say the least of it, unfavourable to the prospects of peace in Europe. The Prussian military caste is still veiy active in Germany, and from the “ junkers ” bellicose and inflammatory sentiments are always to be expected. A point upon which judgment is extremely difficult is as to the extent to which their aims and feelings are endorsed by the German people generally. The country most concerned with what Germany may be doing in defiance of the 'disarmament provisions of the Versailles Treaty, in the best position to be cognisant of what is going on as well as to fake steps to counteract it, is France. The Germans have no reason to hope that the new Government in Franco will be less vigilant than its predecessor in its surveillance of their activities. The Paris correspondent of The Times has reported an interesting conversation with M. Herriot, in the course of which the new French Premier made statements that are of considerable significance at a time when the consideration of the question of a settlement on the basis of the experts’ report on reparations makes harmony particularly desirable. The French Government is disposed, M. Herriot affirms, to adopt a conciliatory policy towards Germany if the German Government will do its part and prevent the German Nationalists from carrying on their propaganda. But M. Herriot is not more satisfied than was M. Poincare with what is happening in Germany. He refers to the efforts that are being made on a large scale to impart military instruction to the young men of Germany. He declares tnat if his Government cannot obtain satisfaction it will deal in the firmest possible way with the German reactionaries, and the appointment as Minister of War of General Nollet, who is credited with being particularly well informed respect' ing the military position in Germany, may well be regarded as a proof of the determination of M. Herriot on this point.

Certainly Germany cannot complain, with much show of reason, that she is misrepresented to the world hy France so long ns a section of her people make it apparent that their designs are the reverse of pacific. It is, after all, from Germany herself that the evidence comes which has raised doubts as to whether she desires peace and a settlement that will enable her to fulfil her obligations, or as to whether she thinks of war in the hope that she may emerge victoriously from it and so wipe out all scores against her. If France is armed, it is not for the reason that she desires war. Hut if Germany is making muni tions, increasing the number of trained men by surreptitious methods, encour aging the formation of groups of students who obey military discipline, and doing nothing to prevent the extension of secret organisations whose avowed object is to foster the National ist and therefore the military spirit, it is assuredly not because she is bent upon keeping the peace. As remedies for the ills of Europe and as safeguards

Tor future peace, Mr Ramsay MacDonald has suggested disarmament and the intervention of the League of Nations. But there is no dismissing the conclusion that the idea of disarmament will make no headway in Europe as long as Germany chooses to remain a fraudulent debtor and harbours thoughts of revenge for her military defeat. That the Government in Berlin is in a somewhat difficult position may be allowed, but in the meantime it can best convince the world that it desires peace by making every effort to contribute to a settlement of the reparations problem. It must prove its; good faith, as M. Doumergue says in a. message to the French Parliament, ‘‘ by definite action and a conciliatory spirit.” The Nationalists claim to be at present the largest party in the Reichstag, and the difficulty which confronts the Chancellor in his effort to secure their ■ co-operation has recently been illustrated in their demand that the German Government should require the Allies to cancel that part of the Peace Treaty dealing with Germany’s responsibility for the war. Section 8 of the Treaty begins, it is of interest to recall, with the words—“ The Allied and Associated Governments affirm, and Germany accepts, the responsibility oi herself and her allies for causing all the loss and damage to which the Allied and Associated Governments and their nationals have been subjected as a consequence of the war imposed upon them by the aggression of Germany and her allies.” This very portion of tho Treaty has formed tho basis of the Allies’ claims to reparations. Dr Marx was not so foolish as to give any encouragement to the Nationalists’ demand. He has expressed his hope of soon reaching a complete agreement on reparations on the lines of the Dawes report. Practical achievement in that ’direction seems to be tho one means whereby a really reassuring complexion can be given to tho situation as between Germany and the Allies.