HOARE SPEAKS

Taranaki Daily News, 21 December 1935, Page 5

HOARE SPEAKS

DEFENCE OF ACTIONS PEACE THE ONE DESIRE DANGEROUS SITUATION FRENCH REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM BASIS FOUND British Wireless. Rugby, Dec. 19. The House of Commons was crowded in all parts in anticipation of a statement by Sir Samuel Hoare, who last night resigned the Foreign Secretaryship, and the debate on the Labour Party’s censure motion condemning the Paris peace proposals. The Prince of Wales occupied a seat over the clock. Sir Samuel Hoare, who was warmly received, rose immediately after the questions. He began with an allusion to the misfortune that a bodily accident added to bodily weariness had laid him aside when he should have been explaining the position to his colleagues and the country. / “Ever since I have been at the For-' eign Office I have been obsessed with the urgent necessity of doing everything in my power to prevent a European conflagration,” he said, “and the no less urgent duty of doing everything to prevent an isolated war between Great Britain and Italy. “W’- the general election came to an end the war had already been in progress some weeks. We had done our best to prevent this outbreak. I myself had done everything within my power to mobilise world opinion against war. In spite of our efforts war had broken out, and every day it continued it involved the world in a graver and more dangerous situation. “There were evil reactions everywhere —in the East as well as in the West, in China, in Egypt and in Europe. In view of these facts I did everything in my power to make a settlement possible whilst loyally continuing the policy of sanctions. “After the election we were engaged on our double task of taking our full share in collective action and the other task imposed on us by the League itself —trying to find a basis of settlement,” continued Sir Samuel. “Particularly we were concentrating on the second task, in view of the situation I saw inevitably developing. In both fields of collective action and peaceful negotiations we reached a turning point about a fortnight ago. “It was clear that a new situation was about to be created by the question of an oil embargo. On all sides we received reports that no responsible Government could disregard that Italy would look upon an oil embargo as a military sanction or an act against her involving war. 1 “Let me make our position quite clear. ' We have no fear whatever as a nation • of any Italian threats. If the Italians ; attacked us we should retaliate, and, • judging from our past history, we should • retaliate with full success. ■ “What was in our minds was something very different—that isolated action of this kind taken by one Power without it having the full support of other Powers would almost inevitably lead to dissolution of the League. PRESSED ON ALL SIDES. “It was in these circumstances that I went to Paris. I was pressed on all sides to discuss the position with M. Laval and attempt to reach with him ,a common basis for peace discussions. It was in an atmosphere of a threat of war that the discussions took place. It was in an atmosphere in which the majority, indeed, the totality, of member States appeared to be opposed to military action. “Within five days,” continued Sir Samuel, “the committee of eighteen was to meet to settle the date for the oil embargo. I could not see how that decision could be justifiably postponed unless negotiations were started. I felt that to have agreed to a postponement without a really justifiable feason would have done veiy great harm to the prestige of the League. “It was a choice between the full cooperation of all member States or a kind of unsatisfactory compromise contemplated in the suggestions M. Laval and I put up at Paris. It was an atmosphere in which we knew that member States had for the most part been prepared to take their part. In the economic sanctions not a single one except ourselves had moved ship, aeroplane or soldier to meet possible emergency. It was an atmosphere in which Anglo-French cooperation seemed absolutely essential if any peace negotiations were to succeed; indeed, if collective action was to continue.” Sir Samuel explained that the Paris proposals seemed to him and M. Layal the only basis upon which it was even remotely likely that the peace discussions could start. It was a minimum basis upon which the French Government was prepared to proceed. He thought it so important to start negotiations that he could not withhold provisional assent, much as he disliked some features of the proposals. Sir Samuel described the proposals in detail with a view to showing that they were not so favourable to Italy as some alleged, and that they were within the framework of the suggestions of the committee of five.