ANGLO-FRENCH RELATIONS

Southland Times, Issue 25690, 5 June 1945, Page 5

ANGLO-FRENCH RELATIONS

Effect Of British Action In Syria (Special Correspondent, N.Z.P.A.) (Rec. 10.20 p.m.) LONDON, June 4. Britain’s action in intervening in Syria is generally endorsed by public opinion here, but there is equally wide dismay at the effect the incident may have on Anglo-French relations. In a striking article entitled “General de Gaulle and France,” “Student of Europe” in The Observer declares that if these relations are to be saved from further serious harm, the two countries must talk to one another plainly, Soberly and truthfully. Stating that many people felt that the Syrian crisis presented Britain with a bitter choice between friendship with the Arabs or friendship with France, the writer says he does not share this opinion and continues, “We believe that Mr Churchill’s courageous intervention may soon be seen to have been of even greater service to British and French than to British and Arab friendship. For it obliged responsible Frenchmen to stand up to General de Gaulle and judge the compatibility of his policy and methods with Anglo-French friendship. It arrested a drift which has become more and more of a nightmare to all those who regard intimate understanding between Britain and France as indispensible to the wellbeing of Europe. CRUEL PARADOX

“It is a cruel paradox that British relations with General de Gaulle have lately degenerated into a state of semihostility just at a time when goodwill for this country, a result of Britain’s war leadership and the close secret partnership between Britain and the French resistance movement, had become more widespread and more deeply felt than ever before among French people,” the writer continues. “This is a cruel paradox, but no mere accident. The rift between the two countries has widened ever since General de Gaulle replied to Mr Churchill’s Western Bloc approach last Armistice Day by putting the appeasement of the French Communists before good relations with Britain, turning his back on the West and going straight to Moscow. And the rift has been unintentionally assisted by British policy through its continued support and appeasement of General de Gaulle and through the deception thereby worked on well-disposed Frenchmen.” This deception at any rate should be brought to an end, says the writer. He says that the clue to General de Gaulle s policy may be found in the solemn closing words of his book, “The Army of the Future,” when he asserts that the sword is the axis of the world and that greatness cannot be shared. “In order to clear France of the stigma of dependence, he has thought it necessary to adopt a suspicious, overbearing attitude towards Britain and the United States. Let us grant him that he aims to establish Frances greatness as he understands it—greatness which the sword can give ana which ‘cannot be shared.’ But this kind of martial chauvinistic ‘greatness’ is obviously not consistent with the merging of France into a western community of which an Anglo-French entente might have been the cornerstone. DE GAULLE’S AIM The prevention of this entente, until he had obtained concessions from Britain both on the Rhine and in the Middle East, therefore became General de Gaulle’s short-term aim. No entente until France had acquired a larger position became his guiding strategy. “If this is accepted, all the extraordinary devious moves of General de Gaulle’s policy in the nine months or his power fall into place. They need no longer be explained away by the stock excuse of his somewhat pathological sensitiveness because they make sense. An open quarrel with Britain was not possible because of the newly won popularity of Britain in France, nor was it in the interests of any Frenchman. But time could be gained by ignoring all British overtures. During this respite General de. Gaulle’s power politics created artificial quarrels and incidents with the double result of estranging British opinion from France and of provoking British reactions which could be presented as anti-French. Hence the uninterrupted series of petty provocations stretching from the Roosevelt and the Stuttgart incidents via the Austa Valley to Syria.” IMPATIENT CRITICISM The writer considers that the British Government is to blame for some of the impatient criticism of France because British statesmen had never up to now had the courage to acknowledge the error they committed in promoting General .de Gaulle to the pinnacle of political leadership. They never, either to their own people or to the French, made a distinction between General de Gaulle and France. But it was they who created the de Gaulle, legend on both sides of the Channel. “How can we expect the French to suspect a man so expressly recommended to them by ourselves of being the obstacle to the coming together of our two nations,” the writer asks. He declares: “Now the policy of the appeasement of General de Gaulle has come to an abrupt end, though not before it had brought Britain and France to the verge of armed hostilities in Syria. The policy of deceptive silence after this no longer makes sense.” Relations between the two countries, he says, should not be conducted in a kind of sick room atmosphere. “If these relations are to be saved from more serious harm, let us talk to one another plainly, soberly and truthfully,” he concludes.

ARAB CO-OPERATION WELCOMED Ties Strengthened Between Eastern Countries (Rec. 8 p.m.) NEW YORK, June 3. Mr William Phillips, special assistant to the Secretary of State, Mr Edward R. Stettinius, in a speech at a dinner in honour of the Regent of Iraq, Prince Abdul Ilah, said that the United States welcomed the. development of Arab cooperation in the form of the League of Arab States. “We are confident that the strengthening of the ties between the various Arab countries will not only be to their common benefit, but will enable them to make important and constructive contributions to the great tasks awaiting the United Nations,” he said. The Associated Press points out that this is the first official American blessing for the Arab League. Mr Phillips also announced that the United . States planned to have American air, radio and telephone communications with every Near East country in the near future if the countries agreed.