Poverty Bay Herald PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING GISBORNE, WEDNESDAY, MAR. 22, 1939. AWAITING THE NEXT MOVE

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 19893, 22 March 1939, Page 4

Poverty Bay Herald PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING GISBORNE, WEDNESDAY, MAR. 22, 1939. AWAITING THE NEXT MOVE

Events in Europe appear to have reached the stage where no immediate developments are to be expected. On both sides there must necessarily be a period of stocktaking. It is not likely that Germany, although perhaps flushed with her latest success, will attempt to make further dramatic advances until she has consolidated the position she now holds. The other Powers, for their part, cannot take hasty action. Nothing can now prevent the German fait accompli and little can be done to counteract it. But what the Powers can do, and doubtless will do, is to lake careful stock of the situation and, in particular, ascertain to what extent they are in agreement on the question of using their joint strength to prevent any further German advances. At the same time, they must also consider what measures might be adopted to make Germany realise and appreciate the reprobation of the rest of the world. Pledges and protests obviously are useless when dealing with a nation that is without honour, and this means that any action to be effective must be direct, decisive, and punitive. Military reprisals at the present stage are out of the -question, but it should, at the outset, be made clear that any future advance will definitely meet with armed opposition and, in the meantime, steps should be taken to demonstrate to

: Germany that she cannot flout world opinion without being penalised economically. The most certain thing is that the time is past for further negotiation. Germany must be treated as the outlaw she has proved herself to be. She should have been so treated from the time she committed her first breach of international law, but at that time there were many people who sincerely believed that she had legitimate grievances and that given an .opportunity she would recapture her position among the nations and become an important factor in the maintenance of peace in Europe. This illusion, however, has now been shattered and it is significant that former ardent Germanophils have lost all their erstwhile optimism and have been forced by experience to realise that Germany simply cannot be trusted in any way. Where there is distrust there must necessarily be precautions. Fortunately, Britain and France have never been misled to the extent of being unprepared, and to-day they are both better armed than at any time in history. With them, in principle at least is Russia, but unfortunately no accurate assessment of Russian strength is obtainable and memories of the collapse of the Russian "steamroller" during the last war have not yet been forgotten. Russia, however, cannot be ruled out of the picture and may yet play an important part in international affairs. The attitude of the United Stales is even more uncertain, but the one thing that is definite there is the steady hardening of opinion against Germany. The American suggestion of a virtual trade boycott of Germany opens up interesting possibilities and the present temper of the nations is probably such that the proposal would find widespread support. Economic sanctions, which is what is inferred, can, however, be a dangerous weapon. In this case it would unquestionably penalise the German people and might drive them to a state of desperation in which, believing that the world was against them, they would support their leaders in any rash venture that might be launched. More, perhaps, might be achieved by striving to enlist the sympathies of the German masses while, at the same time, taking active steps to oppose any further aggressive move on the part of the Nazi leaders. If in this way a position of stalemate could be maintained it would not be long before Germany was confronted with economic bankruptcy, in which event there would be an atmosphere that would be favourable to a policy of compromise in which other Powers could dictate and enforce the terms. Again it can be repeated that time is on the side of the democracies, and to this extent, at least, the policy of Mr. Chamberlain, notwithstanding the rude shock it has received, may prove to have been the wiser course. The position of Germany to-day is nothing new and there is still no reason to believe that Hitler's policy will succeed. Only a few months ago Mr. Chamberlain referred to "the futility of ambition if ambition leads to domination." Germany, of all nations, should long since have learned that lesson. Hitler to-day is following in the footsteps of Frederick the Great, of Bismarck, and of Wilhelm the Second, and his racial ideology is only a revival of the philosophies of Fichte, Frobel, and Nietzsche. They, too, sought domination and the advancement of "kultur," and to suggest that Hitler can succeed where these others failed is to pay an undeserved tribute to the Austrian ex-corporal. Like them, he may make, and, indeed, has made spectacular advances but there is a limit beyond which' he cannot go, and ultimately, like those who preceded him, he is doomed to disillusionment. Hitler himself has truly said that the Nazi doctrine is "not for export," and even should he be inclined to recant he will soon learn that if he attempts to lift the embargo there are others who will effectively impose it. The situation to-day may lead to war and it would be short-sighted and futile to ignore that fact, but even the prospect of war is no occasion for panic. If it does come, then the democracies can enter it with a clear conscience and with the knowledge that' they have been strengthened in every way by everything that has gone before and with the conviction that time again will prove that right must prevail.