BELGIAN NEUTRAL POLICY

Southland Times, Issue 23024, 19 October 1936, Page 7

BELGIAN NEUTRAL POLICY

FRENCH DEFENCE AFFECTED MAGINOT LINE MAY BE EXTENDED FORTS TO THE NORTH SEA (United Press Assn.—Telegraph Copyright.) (Rec. 7.30 p.m.) London, October 17. The repercussions of Belgium’s indication of future neutrality are widely discussed. It is reported that France has decided to extend the Maginot Line of forts along the Belgian frontier to the North Sea. The Daily Telegraph says that whatever her desires may be Belgium can never rest her security wholly upon her own strength. Her friends will have no cause for reproach if the purpose of the King is simply to rally all parties in Belgium to the need for greater sacrifice to avert the possibility of encroachment upon the integrity of Belgium. The Morning Post says that most people will agree that in the new situation Belgium consulted her own best interests by taking this line, for she is a small Power who has no direct concern in the rivalries and antipathies of the great. From the point of view of France in particular, Belgium will be no less useful in guarding her flank as a neutral than in assisting her as r.n ally, provided always that Belgium is strong enough to preserve her neutrality. The News Chronicle questions the practicability of a policy which envisages Belgium being entirely neutral. The only hope for real peace for a country like Belgium, above all others, lies in the firm establishment of a system of collective security, says the News Chronicle.

The Manchester Guardian says that the proposed Belgian neutrality will not necessarily prevent a new Western European pact, for the other four Powers might agree to guarantee her neutrality without asking for reciprocal guarantees, as was the case before 1934. It would, however, prevent the suggested pact between France, Britain and Belgium from coming into force if the negotiations fail. As a result of an interview between the Foreign Secretary (Mr R. A. Eden) and the Belgian Ambassador it is now appreciated in official circles in London that the speech of the King of the Belgians is to be regarded as an indication of the policy Belgium is likely to follow in the five-Power discussions, and that interpretations current in some quarters that Belgium intended to repudiate her obligations, particularly those arising out of the League Covenant, are based on misapprehension.