The Southland Times. FRIDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1939. Brutal Invasion of Finland

Southland Times, Issue 23988, 1 December 1939, Page 6

The Southland Times. FRIDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1939. Brutal Invasion of Finland

WITH the invasion of Finland, announced this morning, Soviet Russia has finally cast aside the peace-lover’s mask she has worn for 10 years and has taken her place beside Nazi Germany as a wanton aggressor. The Soviet’s actions since the signing of the Russo-German Pact have to some extent prepared the world for this new catastrophe. While the Poles were fighting against overwhelming odds she stabbed them in the back and seized a large area of their country. Then followed the successive demands on Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia, supported in each case by the familiar Nazi technique of troop concentrations and violent propaganda. These States bowed to the threat of force; Finland, like Poland, resisted it and determined to maintain her independence. This little State of 3,500,000 people is now suffering what Poland suffered three months ago—bombing and massacre; and the odds against her successful resistance are infinitely greater. With a population little more than twice that of New Zealand she is confronted by one of the great military Powers with an army and an air force vast in numbers—whatever their quality —and supported by 170,000,000 people. The many socialists and communists who have refused to abandon their faith in Russia in spite of her methods in the last three months can no longer escape the fact that Stalin, whatever his ultimate aims, is now aligned with Hitler as a lawbreaker and a brutal oppressor of small nations.

The Balkans Next?

It is too early to estimate the effect of Russia’s move against Finland on the course of the war in the West. But undoubtedly the delations between Russia and Germany are assuming a more ominous shape. Reports of an approaching joint campaign in the Balkans have been coming from various quarters. A message from'Ankara, printed yesterday, claimed that Turkish leaders, including the President and the Chief of Staff, “believe that within a few weeks Russian and German forces may launch a big offensive in the Balkans.” Apparently the aim of Russia would be “to gain control of Central Asia and seek a foothold on the threshold of India,” while Germany “would seek an outlet in. the Mediterranean and access to oil, minerals and foodstuffs, which are abundant in Anatolia and Mesopotamia.” The fact that Britain and France have cooperated with Turkey in strengthening their defensive positions in the Eastern Mediterranean indicates that these possibilities have not been overlooked in official circles. Further proof that trouble may be brewing for the Balkans can be found in the strenuous attempts now being made by both Turkey and Italy to form a nbnaggression bloc in this region. Each of the twp countries has been anxious to gain leadership of the new movement; but the common objective is unity among the Balkan States, and the desire for it is so strong that old rivalries are being put aside with a surprising quickness. If unity is achieved the bloc will bring together a unique collection of “have” and “have-not” States in South-Eastern Europe. But fear is a potent force, and the Balkan Governments are fully aware that unless they shelve their quarrels for the time being they may later be without the freedom to resume them in their own way as independent States.

Obscure Motives

While the weather signs are being interpreted in the Balkans, observers at a comfortable distance from the danger zone are saying that there is nothing to fear. It is true that if all the arguments are examined abstractly joint aggression by Germany and Russia seems unlikely in a region where the interests of the two nations are so much in conflict. But there is small profit in probing after motives of dictators, whose policies are based on a response to realities which include many factors beyond the reach of academic theorists. These theorists are themselves divided on the fundamental issue. Mr G. E. R. Gedye, for instance, claimed in a recent message to The New York Times that the stability of the Soviet Union depends on the conviction of the masses that they are working for a true socialism. “To plunge them into war beside fascists would be to launch incalculable furies over Russia.” If the workers of a socialist State can be hoodwinked into believing ' that their sacred mission includes an attack on a tiny neighbour this comment seems wide of the mark; and it will be noticed, also, that the workers who have been so furiously denouncing the “insolence” of Finland had nothing to say when they suddenly 'found that Adolf Hitler was their true friend after all. A view quite different from that of Mr Gedye was expressed by

Alexander Kerensky, formerly Premier of Russia, in a letter to The New York Times. The present war, he wrote, “is not merely a struggle between two coalitions of States but a decisive, perhaps final, conflict between irreconcilable systems of social life. .. Berlin and Moscow will continue systematically their efforts to realize their joint plan for the destruction of the entire system of humanitarian culture.” This view may still seem a little far-fetched; but the conflict which M. Kerensky foretold is less improbable today than it was yesterday.