The Star. MONDAY, APRIL 10, 1922. THE GENOA CONFERENCE.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 16705, 10 April 1922, Page 6

The Star. MONDAY, APRIL 10, 1922. THE GENOA CONFERENCE.

The meeting between Mr Lloyd George and the French Premier, when the former was on his way to the Genoa Conference, was an interesting

episode. Mr Lloyd George is reported to have assured M. Poincare that if the conference proved abortive owing to the recalcitrancy of France much damage would be done to France in England. He begged M. Poincare to

weigh well the consequences of a negative or passive attitude. The reply of the French Premier was not encouraging. hut it expressed succinctly the French point of view. It was to the effect that the British delegates could rely on France’s support so long as the terms of the Boulogne agreement were adhered to. In other words, this was ail intimation that France would surrender nothing, and Mr Lloyd George’s statement after the meeting that he had a firm conviction that the Genoa Conference would be a great success sounds very much like a platitude. M. Poincare has consistently op posed the Genoa Conference, and he has plainly indicated that he will not allow it to dictate France’s policy in regard to Germany and Russia. France stands for the enforcement of the reparations payments from Germany and the nonrecognition of the Soviet Government in Russia. Britain, on the other hand, finds that her own reconstruction is dependent on the restoration of international trade, and that the suppression of Germany and the isolation cf Russia must affect British conditions. The British man u f acturer supplies the world with goods, but trade cannot be done with countries

which are impoverished by war and the burden of war debts. The efforts of British statesmanship, therefore, have been directed to the re-establishment of international trade and credit, and Britain is in fact the only country which is making a serious and practical effort in that direction. The tentative proposals for the mutual remission of war debts came from Britain, and though the idea was at first received with indignation in America, ns a perfidious plot, it is gaining support in many well-informed quarters. Such a

composition could not fail to take note of German and Russian, liabilities, as economic reconstruction cannot be complete unless the plans include the enemy countries. Both Italy and Britain have moved in this direction, but France, more self-contained than either, has remained hostile. It is impossible to forecast how far the Genoa Conference will be successful, but it may lead to a definite break between the British and French policies. Mr Winston Churchill states that the keyrote of British foreign policy is the production of a good understanding between France and Germany, with an assurance to France that she would not oe left unaided in the event of unprovoked German aggression. The difficulty is that France, whose people, country, and industries suffered so severely in the war, does not desire to be reconciled, and is determined to enforce the penalties which justice de-

creed. This attitude is comprehensible, but it is not going to help ill the economic restoration of the world. The Italian Premier is on sound ground when he declares that “it is imper-

ative that Europe should leave behind the passions of war and initiate a mutual policy of reconstruction between her peoples.” The impatience in Britain with any other policy is growing, and Mr Lloyd George expressed the opinion of the nation in his warning to M. Poincare.