The Star. FRIDAY, MAY 4, 1923. GERMANY CONTINUES A POLICY OF EVASION.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17032, 4 May 1923, Page 6

The Star. FRIDAY, MAY 4, 1923. GERMANY CONTINUES A POLICY OF EVASION.

laced with the fact that the reparations settlement must be made, the Germans have issued a Note outlining- the terms which they are prepared to offer. It is quite in keeping with the policy which the Germans have followed since the armistice that the offer which is now-made is a mere mockery. In the first place the Note is addressed to the Allied Powers instead of to France, though its design is patent enough. The Germans want to get France out of the Ruhr, and they hope that by appealing to Britain and America fhey will induce those Powers to use pressure on France to withdraw. It is characteristic, of the mentality of the German nation that their offer is accompanied by a demand that France evacuate the Ruhr, and that all persons arrested or in exile shall be released and returned to their homes. There must be a deep realisation in Germany that the French have no iutention of leaving the Ruhr. The occupation was not lightly undertaken. As soon as Germany began the attempt to evade the reparations payments—and that was immedately after the conclusion of peace—it was clearly indicated that the French would occupy German territory and enforce payment. The threat was held over the German nation for some years, and the fact that the invasion was delayed was interpreted as an indication that France did not mean what she said. The awakening came last January, when the order to advance was given. M. Poincare, the French Premier, is a strong man who knows what France wants, and he is determined to get it for her. He has small patience with shuffling and evasion, and he is asking for cash and goods rather than promises and vague commissions. The German Note was condemned in France in advance, but its terms were known, so its condemnation was not captious or spiteful. It cannot be too strongly emphasised that France means business. She has her ruthlessly devastated area and her ruined industries to rehabilitate, and she wants the money and the material from the nation that did the damage. What could be more natural, and what could be more just? The tales of German poverty need make no impression. There is poverty in France, and the country would be bankrupt if it had to pay the war debts which were incurred in, repelling the wanton aggressor. It is interesting to observe that the German Note met with a cool reception from the British newspapers, some of which, strangely enough, became strongly anti-French after tlie Ruhr occupation had been carried out. Why they should waste their sympathy on a nation which waged such relentless war on Britain is one of the puzzles of the day. The “ Morning Post,** which is an upholder of the Entente, rightly comments that the framers of tlie Note have served up a mess of stale, rejected ingredients, an unwholesome dish which even less fastidious persons than M. Poincare would instantly reject. The “ Daily Telegraph,” one of the most outspoken of the great British journals, can discern no hope whatever of a renewal of negotiations on the terms laid down. The “ Daily Chronicle,” which is Mr Lloyd George’s organ, suggests that hatred and revenge are supreme in France, and then admits that Germany has made too small an offer. The fact is that Germany must deal with France direct. France knows what is wanted, and is willing to he paid. The Note is only welcome in so far as it shows a disposition to talk business. If it only leads to more haggling it will not improve Germany’s position or shake France’s resolution.