IRISH PORTS AND DEFENCE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23516, 2 June 1938, Page 10

IRISH PORTS AND DEFENCE

Speaking a few weeks ago of the agreement concluded between the Governments of the United Kingdom and Eire, Mr Chamberlain admitted that on the face of it this could not be said to constitute a good agreement from the point of view of the United Kingdom, because of the very large and impressive concessions made to Eire without offer of any corresponding advantage in return. He justified the renunciation of the ports —over which Great Britain has hitherto reserved and maintained defensive control for strategic reasons—as an act of faith, and laid emphasis on Mr de Valera’s reiteration that Eire would not permit Irish territory to be used as a base by any foreign country for attack on Great Britain, and his declaration of his intention to put the ports in a proper state of defence so that he could implement that assurance. Fulfilment of the “ act of faith ” is not to be delayed, and it has been intimated that the formal transfer of the defences will be effected next month. In the terms of his explanation of the considerations by which the British Government has been actuated in this matter, and not least in his reference to its conclusion that a friendly Eire was worth more to the United Kingdom, both in peace and war, than rights which could only be exercised at the risk of maintaining and perhaps increasing ill-will, Mr Chamberlain possibly forestalled or answered criticism of the decision respecting the claims o'f Eire to full control of her own ports more effectively than if he had set out to defend it on severely practical grounds. As expressed in extreme terms, concern over the article of the agreement relative to the defences is a surrender, a “final scuttle” by Britain from points of great strategic importance. The article reads: “The Government of the United Kingdom will transfer to the Government of Eire the Admiralty property and rights at Berehaven (Cork), Cobh (Queenstown), and Lough Swilly now occupied by care and maintenance parties furnished by the United Kingdom, together with buildings, magazines, emplacements, instruments, and fixed armaments with ammunition therefor at present at the said ports.” As for the question of risk taken by the British Government in making these concessions, it must be taken for granted that this article was only inserted in the agreement with the approval of the Admiralty. And that approval, it would be reasonable to suppose, though Mr Chamberlain did not touch on that point, would be conditional on a specific undertaking that the defences would be maintained for use if necessary by Great Britain for her own protection., The British Government will not have made its decision without assurance deemed adequate to justify the transfer of the Admiralty’s property in Eire. There is, however, nothing specific in the agreement to require the maintenance of the defence of these Irish ports or their availability to the British Navy in the event of need. Subject to such room for doubt that may remain on such grounds, the view expressed by The Times that objections to the transfer of British naval and military rights to Eire appear to be outweighed by the political advantages would seem to be sound.