TREATMENT OF GERMANY

Otago Daily Times, Issue 25865, 8 June 1945, Page 9

TREATMENT OF GERMANY

EUROPEAN RECONSTRUCTION

As a basis for discussion, the Rev. A. Marshall gave an instructive and thoughtprovoking address on iha ” Treatment of Germany ” at the W.E.A. meeting on Wednesday night. Mr H. Grocott presided. The case of British and German Imperialism was certainly Interesting, said i Mr Marshall. The British type lf.ckcd the undisguised bru.ality of aims and methods that characterised German Imperialism both in the past and at present. They had to be on their guard against such popular sayings as “ The Germans have always been eager for war,” said Mr Marshall. A look at history revealed that "in Europe during the Middle Ages war was a very lucrative profession, . owing to the custom of exacting heavy | ransom for the liberty of prisoners.” j Germany’s blood lust had caused five wars in the last 75 years. Italy as a kingdom had been in existence for barely 75 years, but had already waged eight wars. Russia hr.d had 12 wars in 75 years. Japan had had 12 wars in 36 years, and was still going strong. And as far as Great Britain was concerned, “ our own Empire, the greatest in history,was not constructed by men wearing kid I gloves" (G. P. Gooch). Between 1870 ; and 1900 Great Britain acquired 4,754,000 square miles of territory; France, 3,583,580 square miles; and in these same years, ; Germany, a bad last, gained 1,026,220 square miles. It was a bit difficult to believe the modern theory tfi?.t it had been only the Germans who had only invented wars, Mr Marshall said. World-Wide Disease German Nazism was part of a worldwide Fascist - disease. The external characteristics changed according to the colour of social life, tradition and temper of the different peoples, but the substance was always and everywhere the same. Defeating Germany, Italy, and Japan did not des;roy Fascism. Fascism was an international growth, and as seen in Germany and Italy had its roots in military, economic, social, and political power. If Germany was to be cured, the old order hs.d to give place to new. The question was what new order, and how were they as victorious nations going ,o treat this diseased country. When Hi.ler was appointed Chancellor the Nazis held only 197 seats out of a to'tal of 647. In the next election Hitler polled 44 per cent, of the votes, and gained 288 seats out of 647. In May, 1935, he won 50 per cent, of Germany on this statement; "Nationalist Germany desires peace from its deeper inner creed and conviction. ... If leaders and rulers only desire peace, the people themselves have never Wanted war:” About half the German nation took Hitler's words at their face value. And so did the majority of statesmen in Britain and the United States. He wondered if they bore some of the guilt with the German people? In 1934, continued the speaker, the opposi.ion in Germany warned the world that Hitler meant war. The world listened to Hitler. Pre-war evidence, however, bore out the opinion that there was a difference between, the Nazis and the German people. 0 Europe’s security required the utter defeat of Na/,i Germany and the destruction of her social and economic forces of militarism and imperialism, said Mr Marshall. Total disarmament and temporary occupa.ion of Germany were certainly necessary means to this end. The problem of the disarmament of Germany was only in the second place a technical problem. It required primarily the destruction of the economic power of the military case; that was the breaking-up of the great es ates of the Prussian aristocracy. It required also ihe destruction of the power of the iron and steel magnates—the heavy industry war-lords. These had been the real rulers of Germany. The Allied nations had sworn to destroy them. They would sow the seeds of the next war if they picked out the seemingly good ones from among them. The future collaborators with Britain had of necessity to come out of the Democratic Party, which had been the foe of the Prussian tradition. Task of Reconstruction Germany was but a part of tile European Commission. People, plant and material had to be diverted to peacetime production, with long term planning, and a European Reconstruction and Public Works Corporation. Vision was required. Should they spend money for peace, or indulge in the pleasures of vengeance, however just? All over the world, wrote an American publicist recently, there were iools to be made and installed, roads to be built, swamps to be drained rivers to be controlled, waterfalls to be harnessed. It was probably in concerted effor.s to do this job, said Mr Marshall, that the people of, the world stood the best chance of finding what William James called “a moral equivalent of-war.” International public works, financed by an interna.ional investment fund, would be dependent for its initial operations on government subsidies. A European planning authority would be needed to plan European economic policies. “It will be our wish,” said Mr Eden in his Mansion House speech on peace aims of May 24, 1941, “ to work with o.hers to prevent . . . the currency disorders throughout Europe and the wide fluctuations of employment, markets, and prices, which were the cause of so much misery in the 20 years between the two wars.” The experience of that period showed that such an end could not be achieved without the establishment of some effective central authority. In conclusion, Mr Marshall stressed that this was in the interests of Europe as a whole, and nofc of any one section of-it. This could be used as constructive British propaganda. The nucleus of power on which the European Planning Authority would depend would, no doubt, be drawn in the first instance from the Englishspeaking countries and from Russia, and the economic as well as the military strength of these countries would necessarily give them a powerful voice in its decisions, at any rate in the first years. The European Planning Authority had from the outset to reject the principle of differentiated standards of living. Living standards had become one of the most crucial issues in international politics, and would constitute what Woodrow Wilson called the acid.test of their sincerity. A policy without this carried the eternal menace of war.