THREAT TO PEACE

Thames Star, Volume LXVI, Issue 19824, 29 September 1936, Page 4

THREAT TO PEACE

AGGRESSIVE POWERS SOVIET VIEW OF EUROPE. ACTIVITY IN ARMAMENTS. Nazi Germany was depicted as the "main aggressive force in present-day Europe," in an address before the Institute of Pacific Relations, delivered by Dr. V. E. Motylev, Director of the Soviet World Atlas and Professor in the Institute of National Economy of the U.S.S.R., chairman of the Soviet delegation to the institute world conference. Dr. Motylev spoke of a rumoured treaty between Japan and Germany, the existence of which was denied by the Japanese delegates to the conference. Dr.- Motylev said: "The enemies of peace work secretly. The fact that such aggressive coalitions (the rumoured treaty) do not correspond to the desires or the information of this or that friend of peace, does not prevent enemies of peace from going very far in their destructive, secret work, which to-mor-row may become visible to all. The sooner the friends of peace become conscious of the reality of aggressive preparations already made and of some 'cooperation' already working, the better it will be for the cause of peace." In discussing the aims and achievements of the Russian people, Dr. Motylev disclaimed any desire to put forth Communistic propaganda. Russia's Exaggerated Claims.

The Australian delegate, Hon. P. W. Eggleston, Melbourne, formerly AttorneyGeneral of Victoria, assailed the claims of Soviet progress as apparent and not real. He asserted that the agricultural advance recorded by Soviet figures in the past six years had been about 10 per cent., that three-fourths of all the Russian economy was agrarian, and hence that Russian claims of total progress were grossly exaggerated. "Indeed," said the delegate, "the Soviet advance is about comparable to that of other countries emerging from the world depression. This moderate advance does not justify the risk that the world may be led through a sea of blood to a promised land which does not exist." Besides laying this "sea of blood" at the door of the World War, the U.S.S.R. delegates said they did not journey to Yosemite to preach the gospel of a Socialistic system, that they did.not desire to evangelise anybody, but that the foremost issue was peace regardless of social systems. A "Classless" Community.

The subject of the new Russian constitution engendered a Russian answer, which is at least curious to some phases of the Western temper. A delegate suggested that in guaranteeing free speech the Soviet constitution omitse'd a guarantee on the one point insisted upon as free speech by the Western nations—that is, the right to criticise. To this the Soviet delegates replied that, as the Russians were a classless people, there was no conflict of interests, hence the necessity of criticism was "unthinkable."

But, said the West, is there not possible a difference of intellectual opinion even without class interests?

It is not within possibility, said Russia.

Supposing the Kulaks (the small proclass), who had supposedly been "liquidated," decided they wanted a return to their former status and decided to start a newspaper, could they do it under the new constitution?

This question was "unthinkable." Such a supposition could not exist, said the Russians.

Another matter alleged not to exist came in for extensive round-table discussion, namely, a rumoured bilateral treaty between Japan and Germany. The Japanese delegation, unofficially but comprising some of the leading figures of the empire, said flatly that there was no such treaty. Despite its apochryphal nature, the French and Brtish delegations immediately declared against it. The French said it would by its very nature be inimical to world peace, and the British particularised, saying such a treaty could not be for geographical reasons, and that Great Britain would protest against any such agreement.