NATIONAL SECURITY

Southland Times, Issue 19492, 5 March 1925, Page 5

NATIONAL SECURITY

PROPOSED GUARANTEE PACT FRANCE COURTS ALLIES GERMAN SCHEME ELABORATED. (By Telegraph.—Press Assn.—Copyright). (Australian and N.Z. Cable Association.) LONDON,March 3. (Received March 4, 11.30 p.m.). Die correspondent of the Daily Express at Paris understands that in the event of Britain refusing to enter the military pact, there is a strong possibility of the drafting of a treaty between France, Poland and Turkey. He says his real reason for France’s cordial friendship with Turkey, which has been allowed to use the Syrian railvway to transport troops against the Kurds, also partly explains M. Herriot’s acquiescence in the refusal to hand over Wrangel’s fleet to the Soviet, is an outburst of Polish official propaganda in Paris. This coincides with the French newspaper clamour that Poland should be the signatory to any security pact. The Daily Mail understands that Germany communicated verbally with the Allied capitals suggesting a pact of security. She is willing to guarantee not to violate the French or Belgian frontiers, recognise Alsace and Lorraine as definitely ceded to France and to admit the permanent demilitarisation of the Rhine zone. The Note omits suggestions for settling the Polish frontier, but expresses willingness on the part of Germany to undertake not to attack Poland without exhausting diplomatic methods. Germany refuses to enter into any engagement concerning Austria or Czecho-Slovakia. NO DECISION YET. UNFOUNDED RUMOURS CURRENT. LONDON, March 3. A lengthy meeting of the British Cabinet was held last evening on questions connected with the Geneva Protocol. This gave rise to rumours that the Government favours an Anglo-Franco-Belgian security pact, with, if possible, German participation. It is learned in influential British circles that, so far as is known, Cabinet has not reached any decision in this connection. Many suggestions have been submitted to Cabinet, but hitherto, so far as is ascertainable, none of these has been adopted. Consequently the statement that certain of the proposals are supported by the Dominions is discredited. ATTITUDE OF BRITAIN. THREE SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT. A COMPLEX PROBLEM. LONDON, March 4. (Received March 4, 8.5 p.m.) The diplomatic correspondent of the Daily Telegraph says that there have been many memoranda circulating in official circles regarding a substitute pact for the protocol, but the Government has come to no conclusion. It has not made up its mind, still less have the Overseas Dominions approved or disapproved of the new policy. Cabinet has listened to an exposition by Lord Balfour, who was specially invited to address its members as an elder statesman.

The amendments proposed by the Committee of Imperial Defence, which it is expected will be submitted to the Overseas Dominion Governments immediately, are of a far-reaching character, and take the heart out of the Geneva protocol as all the vital articles are deleted or substantially modified As regards alternative policy, there are three conceptions which still require to be harmonised within the Cabinet: — (1) Favouring a direct pact with France and Belgium; (2) Favouring a policy of isolation without entanglements in Europe; or (3) A mutual pact between Britain, France, Belgium, Italy and Germany. It is understood that Mr Austen Chamberlain (Minister of Foreign Affairs), is in favour of first believing that Britain owes a guarantee to France and Belgium owing to the Anglo-American pact of 1919, a variant designed as a compromise to win over the Overseas Dominions. There would be no binding pact, but a system of consultation between the British, French and Belgian staffs for the purpose of countering fresh German aggression. The school in the Cabinet favouring isolation is a small minority of Ministers, who contend that the feeling in the Overseas Dominions is against entangling alliances on the Continent, and that the dominions would not adhere to such an alliance without the assent of their Parliaments which those Parliaments will not give. The third school includes a majority of Cabinet and Lord Balfour. This school hopes to embrace and harmonise the conceptions of both the Motherland and the Overseas Dominions. None of these schools of thought are prepared to guarantee the frontiers of Poland and Czecho-Slovakia. THE WORLD AS JUDGE. EVIDENCE SHOULD BE PUBLISHED. LONDON, March 4. (Received March 5, 2.0 a.m.) The Earl of Oxford (Mr Asquith) speaking in the House of Lords, asked when the report on German disarmament would be published. He insisted that evidence should be published in order that the world would be able to judge. The Marques Curzon made a noncommittal reply.

THE GERMAN PROPOSAL. WORTHY OF THOROUGH EXAMINATION. LONDON, March 3. (Received March 5, 2.0 a.m.) It is confirmed that Germany has notified the Allies of her willingness to discuss the formation of a quadruple pact on the basis of frontiers established by the Treaty of Versailles. Die Times, in the course of an editorial, declares that the German proposal ought to make the whole idea of the pact more palatable in both Britain and the Overseas Dominions. British Cabinet opinion is known to be hardening in favour of guaranteeing the Franco-Belgian frontier, but the idea of merely reviving an old discouraging and discredited pact arouses little enthusiasm. Die Morning Post says that enthusiasm would be very different if the possibility arose that Germany would become an active and sincere partner in such an arrangement. From that viewpoint the Berlin proposal deserves careful consideration. ATTITUDE OF THE DOMINIONS. DEFINITE DECISION IN A FORTNIGHT LONDON, March 3. (Received March 5, 2.5 am.) “Far from treating the matter as easy of understanding cr solution, several of the most important dominions have not yet given a decision.” This was the reply of the Marquess Curzon in the House of Lords to Lord Parmoor who, in pleading for the adoption of the Geneva protocol, asserted that nothing therein created alarm in the dominions. He said the dominions were fully advised throughout the discussions at Geneva and their advice was frequently adopted. The Marquess Curzon stated that the Imperial Defence Committee or committees thereof sat unceasingly for three months, subjecting the complex document to an exhaustive scrutiny. He added that some of the dominions had sent provisional replies and he foreshadowed that a definite decision would be reached in about a fort-