THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES MONDAY, January 31, 1938. WORLD PROBLEMS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23413, 31 January 1938, Page 8

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES MONDAY, January 31, 1938. WORLD PROBLEMS

The Belgian statesman M. Van Zeeland, in his much-heralded report on the means by which a muchdesired improvement in international relations might be sought, comments that some nations do not see any solution of their economic problems except by a redistribution of colonies. Others, he says, attribute their difficulties to exaggerated protection or to the unequal distribution of capital, while there are still others that regard rearmament on a colossal scale as an underlying cause of economic conflict. M. Van Zeeland appears, in effect, to group the world’s problems under three main heads—general obstacles to international trade, policies, of rearmament, and the adaptations required to minimise or negative the effects of the first two. He shows that the issues involved are largely economic, but he realises also that such issues inevitably involve major problems of politics. Conditions of acute economic crisis produced in the first instance the existing barriers to the free conduct of international trade. These were devices adapted by certain States to safeguard the national economy against the disturbing effects of violent change, and their operation, as M. Van Zeeland points out, by transforming the whole basis of economic relations, has created an entirely new set of complications. Some months ago a writer in the Contemporary Review, discussing the question of raw material and colonies, argued that the system of controlled economies, originally adopted as a defence against world crisis, had proved a perfect instrument for developing national armaments on a scale hitherto unimagined in times of peace. Why, he asked, were such gigantic armaments wanted—for war, or for peace? “ If for peace, then the difficulties over raw materials for their production can be effectively met by agreeing to limit or reduce arms. If for war, then the demand of nations which want great and assured supplies of raw materials, whatever their policy or conduct, is tantamount to a demand that other countries should help them to victory.” The conclusion reached is one that will have greater significance when the reactions of some States to the proposals contained in the van Zeeland report are accurately revealed. In the final analysis, it is suggested, the specific problem of colonies and raw materials —which has a profound bearing on the general problem of economic appeasement examined by M. van Zeeland—is a door with two locks. The possessing Powers hold one key, which is represented by their willingness to make the resources under their control available for the pacific needs of all countries equally. It is British policy, as is well known, to invite exploration of that avenue of escape from the present impasse. The second key, which the dissatisfy Powers hold, “ is their answer to the question of method.” Will they be content ■ with the “ adjustments which can be made by peaceful means, even if not wholly to their liking, or do they intend to try to impose their own solution by force? ” It is because the possibility of such a dire sequel cannot be ignored any longer that the many-sided problem of the freer exchange of raw materials and manufactured goods ceases to be merely one of economics and becomes one of politics—“ a supreme matter of national life or national death.” As M. van Zeeland sees it, the heart of the problem of restoring international trade and abating the fears and suspicions that are plaguing the world is “ the necessity of inducing many countries to mitigate or abandon measures of

protective self-sufficiency and to return to a more complete system based on the international division of labour.” Such a division implies, first of all. recognition of the varying resources of the nations and of their skill and application in using them, and, secondly, a more equitable distribution of the rewards of labour in every sphere. It implies, in short, the attainment of an ideal in international relations. Within the limits imposed by the enormous complexity of existing relations M. van Zeeland has been able to point to directions in which progress toward that goal might be attempted. Those nations which really desire to facilitate the peaceful adjustment of trade relations will examine the report with an open mind before pronouncing upon it. It was not to be anticipated that immediate reactions would be entirely favourable. The issues run too deep, and interests will conflict in too many places, to allow of easy decision upon a means of approach.