DEBATE ON ARMS

Taranaki Daily News, 14 March 1935, Page 5

DEBATE ON ARMS

REACTION IN EUROPE REARMAMENT FIGURES GERMAN APPEASEMENT PROTEST AT WHITE PAPER TONE OF PRESS COMMENT By Telegraph—Press Assn. Copyright. London, March 12. “Mr. Stanley Baldwin, in a jauntily defiant mood, not only refused to apologise for the White Paper and the occasion of its publication but deliberately justified both,” says the News Chronicle. “His defence at best was a half truth. He gave no assurance that the Government was not proposing to abandon the idea of collective security.” The Daily Mail says: “The British cannot be defended by fine phrases or by leaving protection to other nations, which is the real interpretation of the pompous Socialist talk about collective security and the League. . A large loan to provide an imposing air fleet would be perfectly justified.” “If dictatorships believe that. their countries must be self-sufficient in war time democracies would be feeble defenders of the collective system if they alone believed that they could remain inadequately armed, ’’ says the Times. “The British democracy will certainly mainly agree with Mr. Baldwin’s and Sir Austen Chamberlain’s statements.” The News-Chronicle's Berlin correspondent says that Herr Hitler was kept specially informed of the progress of the British arms debate. Portions of the speeches directly bearing on the German situation were telephoned to Munich from London and were relayed to the Chancellor’s home. The debate is also featured in the German newspapers. “IN FRIENDLY SPIRIT.” The Volkische Boebachter, commenting lengthily on Mr. Baldwin’s speech, notes that satisfaction with the White Paper references. to Germany were intended in a friendly spirit. “But it remains regrettable,” continues the paper, “that so little of this spirit is traceable in the document and that in the opinion of practically the whole world a relapse into Versailles methods and the 1919 way of thinking had to be recorded. Germany welcomes negotiations on condition that her equality is neither theoretically nor practically infringed.” The editorial specially welcomes Mr. Baldwin’s reference to Russia, “which avowedly for the purpose of a world Communist revolution possesses the strongest war power in the world.” It concludes that Germany’s disappointment would not have burst out if the facts cited by Mr. Baldwin had headed the White Paper’s survey. Herr Paul Scheffer, editor of the Tfigeblatt, finds satisfaction in Mr. Baldwin’s statement that Germany is not the only nation engaged in increasing armaments, but he complains that much for which the White Paper was criticised is still left unmentioned. The Deutsche-Allgemeine Zeitung says that the British Government realised the mistake made by one-sidedly accusing Germany in the White Paper, and Mr. Baldwin endeavoured to remedy this. “TRUE EXPLANATION.” “Not the White Paper but Mr. Baldwin’s speech contains the true explanations of Britain’s military budget,” the paper says. “The net result is crisp and sober, namely, that the British Government has taken back nothing but has also made good its own case by pointing to the armaments of nations other than Germany.” The Frankfurter Zeitung says: “The debate has not removed the fact that Britain seems to have embarked on a policy which definitely excludes a serious reduction in armaments or any discussions on last year’s basis.” A Paris message says that Mr.. Baldwin’s speech is regarded as a vindication of the Franco-British “work for peace—but not at any price.” It favourably impressed official circles who see in it a parallel to M. Flandin’s recent speech. Both, it is pointed out, proclaimed the desire of the respective countries to organise peace security while maintaining that the moment had come for an overhaul .of defence arrangements.

“Pertinax” in the Echo de Paris, referring to the confession of the German authorities that military aviation on April 1 takes its place among the regular forces of the Reich, says: “Three years ago Britain and France could have stopped the rearmament which is going to break loose. The opportunity, however, is lost. Peace can be saved only if Germany judges from the defence measures of her neighbours that war would not be without peril for ner. Herr Hitler has given the Anglo-German negotiations. a tenor which their original instigators certainly have not wished for.”