MENACES TO PEACE

Taranaki Daily News, 22 January 1935, Page 9

MENACES TO PEACE

JAPAN’S URGENT NEEDS

INDUSTRIALISM HER LIFELINE.

OMINOUS SYMPTOMS IN EUROPE.

STILL WORSE IN THE EAST.

The very ominous condition of affairs in eastern Asia was referred to by Mr. Frank Milner in his address on International Affairs given to the teachers’ summer school at New Plymouth last night. Mr. Milner quoted General Smuts as having stated that menacing as were conditions in Europe, the position in the East was still more ominous. Japan was the most heavily armed nation in the world, even more heavily than France. She had a fine army and a navy second only to that of Great Britain. Japan had claimed full naval parity with Britain and America, she had pursued a militant Manchurian policy, had, in spite of covenants to the contrary, closed the doors in Manchukuo, had declared a Japanese “Monroe Doctrine” for Asia, had repudiated the League of Nations and had openly announced her readiness to fight, if need be, in support of her policy. Of those who would say that Japan had a swollen head and would be the better of a little bloodletting, Mr. Milner would ask consideration of the following facts. There was a stark economic urge driving the Japanese towards industrialism. Japan must take that course, or starve. Ito annual increase in population was over a million. Neither birth control, emigration nor intensified agriculture could provide a solution of the congestion. If no more babies were born provision must be made to absorb an average of 250,000 additional workers for the next 20 years. The Japanese loved their children. They saw only one way of keeping them from starvation; that was by becoming a highly industrialised nation. This was conditional upon access to raw materials and a sufficient allocation of markets. The Japanese did not like emigration. There were but 630,000 Japanese living abroad, including 200,000 in Manchukuo. Brazil had offered Japan 2,500,000 acres of fertile land, but there were only 120,000 Japanese in Brazil, and the number of migrants returning to the homeland was greater than that of those leaving.

RAW MATERIALS ESSENTIAL.

Therefore only industrialisation was possible, and for this raw materials were essential. Japan was not merely challenging other countries in textile manufactures; it meant to challenge in the heavy industries as well. It was hoped that Manchuria would have given Japan these supplies, but that had not proved the case. Manchurian coal would not produce the metallurgical coke required for the blast furnaces, oil could not be obtained, and Manchurian iron ore was hematite of too low content to produce, without expensive chemical concentrates, the pig iron Japan needed. In consequence Japan had to obtain pig iron from Malaya and Bengal. Mr. Milner said the talk of Japan as being industrially inefficient was “all bunk.” Its industrial conditions were good and its workmen efficient. An English investigator found that a Japanese weaver after six months* training could look after 20 of the modern cotton looms, while weavers in Lancashire averaged only eight looms after a lifetime of training. Japan’s low standard of living and of industrial costs, combined with the depreciation of its currency, had given it a tremendous competitive advantage. It was prepared to buy raw materials but asked in return that its manufactured goods should be admitted. The Japanese attitude was that industrialism was the lifeline to save it from starvation. If that lifeline was cut because raw materials were withheld or exports kept out of other countries by embargoes Japan was ready to fight. It was well armed, its people were intensely nationalistic, they had been educated to give themselves freely for their country, and they were ready, though they did not desire to fight. The only solution of the problem seemed to be for Britain and America to meet Japan in a spirit of friendship, find out what Japan’s minimum trade demands were, and see if in a spirit of amity a way out of the deadlock could be found.

COMPLEX OF FEAR.

In regard to Europe, continued Mr. Milner, the nations were labouring under an inferiority and fear complex. The explanation of Hitlerism could be found in the cynicism of the Treaty of Versailles. That treaty was made when the war was just over and the feeling was general that Germany must be kept from disturbing the peace again. France, however, regarded the treaty as a means of keeping Germany stereotyped for all’ time, an impossibility with a great Power of 63,0-30,000 people who had become famous in the arts and in science. France could not believe there would not be a war of revenge. Since the Great WaiFrance had spent £25,000,000 in fortifications on its eastern border, and intended to spend at least £10,000,000 more. It was training black troops in readiness to balance Germany’s greater man power, and it could not be convinced that a war of revenge could be avoided. The attempt to keep Germany down had bred the passions that found expression in Hitlerism. Germany saw that promises of other nations to disarm were not kept, and it lost all hope. Until Germany received parity it would continue a menace. General Smuts had said that it was England’s magnanimity after the Boer War that kept South Africa for the Empire, and magnanimity was always worth while. Mr. Milner said that in the present conditions peace pacts were almost farcical. The Kellogg Pact had made no difference to the growth of armaments. The only pacts that had done that were the Washington and London Naval Treaties, and the acid test of peace pacts was whether they reduced armaments or not. He found it impossible to feel enthusiastic about the recent agreement made between' France and Italy, because for the moment they were afraid of what Hitler might do in regard to Austria. Poland had broken away from its old alliance with France and made a treaty with Herr Hitler because it feared what Russia might do, while the position in the Balkans was full of menace. In Italy the population was increasing and that country must become industrialised or obtain further relief by emigration. If industrialisation were depended upon Italy must have markets for its manufactures, and here again was a possible source of friction. The British Empire had enough land to satisfy its needs, the United States was economically self-sufficient, and Russia was satisfied with her territories. Germany and Japan had neither the land nor the raw materials necessary for their development, but they would obtain them—by fighting, if necessary. It was necessary, concluded Mr. Milner, to try to put oneself in the other fellow’s place when considering international affairs. Japan had a positive case for sympathetic consideration, and Germany was not wholly to blame for its present condition. So far as he could judge, there could be no permanent peace until Germany saw hope of parity with other great Powers, even if under safeguards: and until the claims of landhungry nations such as Japan, Italy and

Germany were subjected to sympathetic and scientific inquiry with power to take the necessary action. Only the League of Nations could collaborate in such an inquiry, and for that reason the League should be supported. Tire alternative was anarchy. Mr. Milner was thanked for his address on the motion of Mr. R. H. Quilliam. Mr. D.<M. Rae presided.