The Daily News MONDAY, JULY 8, 1929. RELATIONS WITH RUSSIA.

Taranaki Daily News, 8 July 1929, Page 8

The Daily News MONDAY, JULY 8, 1929. RELATIONS WITH RUSSIA.

It is not at all surprising that Soviet Russia is taking a high hand in relation to the resumption of relations with Britain. According to a recent cablegram, the Moscow ' newspapers are unanimous that the Soviet will not agree to any preliminary negotiations to determine the conditions of diplomatic relations, it being recalled by the Soviet organ Izvestia that “immediate unconditional resumption was a plank of the Labour Party’s election platform. It is, therefore, argued that the Soviet, rather than Great Britain, should advance conditions and demand guarantees.” That contention is equivalent to turning the tables on Britain and making her a suppliant for Bolshevik favour, and, by inference, implies that the Russian Government will persist in its policy not to recognise the debts owing by that country to Britain. It will be remembered that the previous Labour Government at Home was brought to an end mainly owing to its Russian policy and its proposal to guarantee a substantial loan to the Soviet Government, and it will be a striking coincidence if flirting with the Soviet will cause history to be repeated. The new volume of official documents, which deals with the Anglo-Russian Rapprochement (1903-1907) makes a - singularly complete and dramatic study, for

it is really the internal history of the competition between Britain and Germany for the goodwill of Russia, besides which it throws a new light upon European politics and the complexities of the European system. It emphasises that whenever England was polite to Germany, French politicians became nervous, and that King Edward’s visit to Kiel in 1904 caused considerable alarm in Japan, where Germany was regarded with great suspicion. The volume reveals what Witte thought Russia might claim if she won the war with Japan, but he evidently thought that a sweeping’ Russian victory would be a bad thing for Russia, and he had no confidence in the Tsar. “The Anglo-Russian Convention (1907) is a great triumph for British .diplomacy,” wrote King Edward, and great praise was accorded to Sir Arthur Nicholson for his tact and skill in carrying it out. It is said that a review of the volume makes it seem astonishing that when the great crisis came Russia and Britain were Allies, and not Russia and Germany. That fact is deemed the more remarkable as everything previously had been in Germany’s favour, for England was the ally of Japan, with whom Russia was at war. Great Britain, moreover, had many difficulties with Russia—on the question of the Dardanelles, on Afghanistan, Persia and Tibet —whereas Germany had very few. It well might have been thought that Germany and Russia ■would combine against Britain, especially as an alliance with Germany was much more congenial to the instincts and traditions of Russian officials and the courtiers who generally gained the ear of the Tsar. How, then, did things turn out so badly for Germany? If German foreign policy had been in the hands of men of skill and deliberate judgment, that country, while probably not succeeding in forming the antiBritish coalition it so greatly desired, could have prevented the growth of the triple Entente. It was the Kaiser’s temperament which ruined all Germany’s plans, for when Russia was clearly going fast downhill he used her weakness to try to snatch advantages over Morocco, and so lost one advantage after another. The wonder is, not that the Great War came in 1914, but that Europe escaped the disaster so long. Much of this illuminating historical record gives an insight into the reason why Russia deserves some consideration from Britain, and had that country not drifted into a state of chaos and anarchy, and become a menace to the rest of the civilised world by means of the ruthless doctrines it adopted, it would to-day be a world power instead of a ’world reproach. It is, however, generaly recognised that a return to normal conditions in Europe is most desirable, yet it has been convincingly demonstrated that there must be effective safeguards adopted when friendly diplomatic relations are resumed, one of those safeguards being the recognition of her financial obligations, while another is a reliable pledge to abstain from revolutionary propaganda. Can the Soviet turn aside from its avowed policy of creating disorders, or is unreliability as regards its pledged word to continue? No task that the British Labour Government has in hand needs more skilled handling than that of resuming diplomatic and commercial negotiations with Russia. The high-handed tone of the Russian Press does not augur well for success.