THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES MONDAY, November 9, 1936. BRITISH FOREIGN POLICY

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23033, 9 November 1936, Page 6

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES MONDAY, November 9, 1936. BRITISH FOREIGN POLICY

While last week's debate in the House of Commons on the subject of international relations led perhaps nowhere in particular, it was not without its informative aspects. The foreign policy of Great Britain has not escaped some internal criticism in the light of international developments and occurrences during the past year. The charge has occasionally been advanced that the Government has bungled its relations with foreign countries. But it is unreasonable to suggest, for example, that this allegation is substantiated in such a circumstance as Italy's resentment over Britain's observance of her obligations under the League Covenant In a general review of relations between Britain and other countries, the Foreign Secretary has put these matters in a useful perspective. In regard to the Mediterranean, which, since it is vital to Italy's existence, is also an essentia] avenue of communication between the nations of the British Empire, there is no need for any misunderstanding between Italy and Great Britain if. as his professions seem to indicate, Signor Mussolini is no more desirous of interfering with the freedom of that sea than the British Government is. According to the Foreign Secretary, there is a general reciprocation in Great Britain of the desire often expressed by Germany for closer friendship between the two countries. But, as he has pointed out, Germany renders such a rapprochement difficult by her attitude to other Powers. The friendship which Great Britain can proffer can be neither exclusive nor directed against any country. The official reception in Berlin of Mr Eden's statement seems to have been favourable, but the German newspapers, not presumably without inspiration, profess to regard as incomprehensible the idea that Anglo-German friendship cannot be directed against other Powers, and they emphasise that Germany's hostility to Russia must'be taken into account by those desiring her friendship. Yet the German Government professes to have a great desire for peace. As Mr Winston Churchill pointed out in a speech commending Mr Eden's genera] statement, if Germany's trouble consists in fear of a Bolshevist invasion it is open to her to join with other well-armed and peace-seeking Powers for the establishment, under the League of Nations, of a front against which an aggressor could not hope to prevail. Mr Eden has made it clear that the British Government still believes the principles of the League to be the best yet devised for the regulation of international affairs, and hopes, despite the present attitude of certain European Powers, to make the authority of the League

"as important as possible." Her Government was ready, he declared, to make it plain to the world that Great Britain would be second to none in defence of her legitimate interests. The strength of British armaments is regarded by it as of paramount importance to the preservation of peace. The weight of the argument has to be conceded. A strong nation bent on promoting peace and security may accomplish much; but a weak nation not only can do little, but even invites aggression. The "striking measure of agreement" among all sections in the House of Commons with the policy indicated by Mr Eden, upon which the Chancellor of the Exchequer placed emphasis, is a reflection, it may be believed, of the general feeling of the nation. Mr Chamberlain left no room for any supposition that the British Government might return to the old system of alliances, the division of Europe into opposing blocs, with Britain endeavouring to hold the balance of power or allying herself with one or other of them. The alternative, he pointed out, was to continue the search for a system of collective security which would establish and maintain peace. That implies an effort to strengthen the League of Nations and buttress it by some system which would help to?maintain peace in those parts of the world most subject to stress and strain. In the view of the British Government regional pacts, based on vital national interests, and subject to genera] obligations under the League Covenant, offer the most hopeful instrument for the promotion of collective security. Such is its reply to Signor Mussolini's recent declaration that collective security never has existed and never will exist. The conclusion to which the twenty-one nations that are to be represented at the Inter-American Peace Conference at Buenos Aires may come respecting the security issue will be of great interest.