The Timaru Herald. THURSDAY, MAY 2, 1935. THE OUTLOOK TN EUROPE.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXIX, Issue 20097, 2 May 1935, Page 8

The Timaru Herald. THURSDAY, MAY 2, 1935. THE OUTLOOK TN EUROPE.

Notwithstanding the outbursts of The Daily Mail and similarlyintentioned journals in London and on the Continent, it is safe to say that a swift-arming Germany has apparently brought more unanimity of viewpoint among the European Powers than has been known since the Treaty of Versailles was signed. The London journal takes strong exception to the suggestions emanating from Moscow in relation to defensive measures the East and West of Europe should take in the face of Germany’s bold challenges to the Powers of Europe and Asia. The discussion was raised by the publication of the following message furnished by the Riga correspondent of The Times:

"The Comitern is supplementing the policy of M. Maxim Litvinoff, Soviet Foreign Minister, of Peace Pacts by a parallel chain of proletarian pacts, encircling Germany. It is questionable whether the decision has anything beyond an advertisement value.

“The Comitern section In Great Britain and in all countries bordering on Germany, except Holland and Switzerland, has been instructed to create anti-German committees to demonstrate against German conscription and rearmament and to enlist the aid of Communists, unorganised Labour, the British Labour Party, the Independent Labour Party, and similar bodies in other countries. It will be urged that Russia must increase her army because Herr Hitler means war, but his overthrow by a proletarian revolution will destroy Germany’s war zest.

Taking the stand that the policy of attempting the encirclement of Germany would create a situation that would, lead to war The Daily Mail warmly denounces the Soviet authorities and demands that British statesmanship should guard against being hoodwinked by the hypocrisy of Moscow. Everything said by'the section of the English press represented by The Daily Mail, may Jhave founda-, tion in fact as far as Moscow is concerned, and the Soviet leaders may be trustworthy or they may be the “thugs and brigands” alleged by a section of the critics, but unpleasant facts stare Europe and Asia in the face. From the outset of the “exploratory” talks with European Powers indulged in by British statesmen, it has been plain that Germany has been determined to secure important concessions, including:

An economic union with Austria. The elimination of the Polish Corridor, which, under the Treaty of Versailles, gives Poland access to the sea. The return of some Czech territory, with the repatriation of 3,500,000 Germans there. Aviation strength equal to the airforces of Britain or France, the level to be governed by the airstrength of Russia. A navy of approximately 400,000 tons. An army equal to the highest point of French strength. These demands are regarded by British officials as a new problem in the European situation. The demands show that Germany is finished with the League and the Versailles Treaty. It has been predicted that the whole tangled relation of Continental nations would have to be examined anew at the conference at Stresa. Much calmer in tone, however, was the statement of Sir John Simon, made in the House of Commons directly after his return from Berlin. He said that the Berlin conversations had revealed “considerable divergence of opinion, but the result undoubtedly will lie valuable, and both sides will he able clearly to understand their respective viewpoints—a process indispensable to further progress.” With characteristic British diplomatic cautiousness he asserted that “under all circumstances it is obviously undesirable to make a full statement on the position of affairs still under investigation.” He added that “unauthorised speculation such as had appeared in some quarters should he disregarded.” No further speculation is necessary because Germany has boldly and fearlessly declared her determination to rearm regardless of treaty obligations or the frowns of the Powers of Europe. France on her part lias consistently insisted that “had no alternative but to strive ceaselessly to build up a collective peace organisation offering her protection against the perils which beset her. “It is also a fact that France,” declared the French Foreign Minister, something like a month ago, “in her own concern ns well as for the redemption of all nations from the scourge of war, must not shut her eyes to the rearming of her neighbours.” For some weeks, many trustworthy observers welcomed the bright light which the Berlin and Moscow visits shed on the dangerous state of affairs in Europe, but subsequent developments have confirmed the view of those who insisted that the progressive deterioration of the situation had yet to be arrested, and that the mere “clarification” of the relations between the Powers of Europe does not alter the realities of peace or war, or disprove the clear evidence that armaments are piling up and fears of a major conflict are daily increasing.