RELATIONS WITH RUSS!A

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 19783, 5 March 1927, Page 7

RELATIONS WITH RUSS! A

BRITAIN’S NOTE

DISCUSSION IN PARLIAMENT

USE OF “BIG SUCK" ADVOCATED

Relations with Russia formed the subject of discussions in both Houses of the British Parliament. Arguments for and against the breaking-off of negotiations were put forward, but little matter not already made public was brought to light, and negotiations do not seem likely to be further advanced as a result of the debates.

[By Telegraph—Per Press Assn.—Copyright]

INCREASED TRADE UNDERMINING BOLSHEVISM HOUSE OF COMMONS DEBATE LONDON, March. 3. In the House of Commons, tho Civil Service vote, Sir Archibald Sinclair (Liberal) moved to reduce tho Foreign Secretary’s salary in order to draw attention to Anglo-Russian relations. He pointed out that British trade with Russia during the last three years amounted to £31,000,000 to £44,000,000, and £38,000,000 respectively. It was impossible to stop propaganda by rebukes or force. The maintenance of trade relations was gradually and steadily undermining Bolshevism. Russia was producing a revival, but the severance of relations would plunge Britain into isolation. It would ruin a substantial trade and imperil the peace of Europe. Sir Austen Chamberlain, despatching the Note, had been torn between his boter judgment and the dictates of the Conservative diehards. Sir Robert Horne said he was not ashamed of his own efforts to improve Anglo-Russian relations in 1921, but every hope had failed to materialise. He had always advocated restraint and opposed the sudden breaking-off of relations, but how long were they to be patient Tho limit of endurance had been reached by tho Russian agitation against Britain in China. Ho added: ‘ln my judgment much greater injury would accrue to peace and the reconstruction of Europe by the loss of our authority in the councils of nations than as tho result of the breaking-off of Anglo-Russian relations.” (Ministerial cheers). Ministers* Speeches Criticised Mr Ramsay V n eDonald charged the Conservatives with mischievous subversive propaganda against Russia. Though the trade agreement was operating, Ministers and members had gone up and down the country attacking the Russian Government and doing everything to hamper trade. Everyone was ever willing to assume Soviet hostility. Tho Soviet’s reply to the Note could not be left where it was. If Britain listed specific points of complaints and negotiated upon them, and if no agreement was reached advantageous to botn countries, he would admit being more mistaken than ho had ever been in his lifetime. Sir Austen Chamberlain said that the previous specific protest had not produced satisfaction. The basis of complaint was not the isolated acts of subordinates, but tho universal disregard of the primary object of the trade agreement. It was tho deliberate fomenting of world revolution and deliberate interference with tho internal affairs of other nations. The Soviet was guilty of the very sort of conduct which Mr MacDonald, when Prime Minister, had declared made diplomatic relations impossible. An Anglo-Rus-sian breach might have a most disturbing effect on the European situation. He had, therefore, urged upon the Government patience and forbearance, despite the great provocation that Britain had endured, but there wore lines beyond which patience could not be carried.

They asked Russia henceforth to pursue a policy conforming to the ordinary comity of nations, and abstain from efforts to promote world revolution, and from interference in Britain’s international affairs.

“Insult and Evasion” Sir Austen Chamberlain said that .verbal acceptance would not be enough. Acts must show whether there was go-* ing to be redress of a long series of outrages. The Government reserved the right to judge tho expediency and the time for any further steps. “We thought it right to take tho world to witness the serious nature of our complaints and to give the Soviet another opportunity to conform with the ordinary rules of international life and conduct” he concluded.

Mr Lloyd George condemned the speeches against a Government with which Britain had official relations. An attempt should have been made by the representatives of both countries to solve the difficulties. This might not mean a new agreement, but it might mean a new spirit. Commander Locker Lampson said that Britain’s Note belonged to a long brood of brothers, all of whom were stillborn. It announced to the world the degree of humiliation tho Empire was ready to swallow lying down. The Soviet’s reply did not contain an apology or contribution. It was an amalgam of insult, evasion, and further humiliation. He advocated “A big stick and a bigger boot for the anthropoid apes of the Bolshevik jungle.” Mr Philip Snowden said that an Anglo-Russian breach would only encourage Communist propaganda, which he detested. Let Sir Austen Chamberlain try to open a new chapter or Anglo-Russian relations. Russia would be reasonable ,because without outside help the Russian economic system would break down. The motion was defeated by 271 votes to 146. STRONG ACTION JUSTIFIED FIGHTING PROPAGANDA BRITAIN’S HANDS LEFT FREE LONDON, March 3. In tho House of Lords, Lord Newton drew attention to the Soviet’s reply to the British Note. .He expressed the opinion that the breaking off of diplomatic relations and the cancellation of the trade agreement had been justified over and over again. Lord Reading said he saw no advantage in either course. He doubted W'hether any other country would follow Britain’s example. Britain’s hanus should be left free for further action, if and when necessary. Lord Salisbury said that the peace and prosperity of the world depended on Britain’s proper conduct of foreign affairs. She must not, through pique, injured dignity ,or some trivality, take action capable of great harm. Viscount Grey said that every line of Britain’s Note was justified, but he doubted the expediency of sending it. The Soviet was only using the Noto to imbue the Red Army with the Tdea that Britain intended to attack Russia. “Our prestige and reputation would have been better served by silence,” said Viscount Grey. “The only way to meet propaganda is with counterpropaganda. The Government could not undertake this, but constitutionallyminded Labourites and trade unionists, who were the people immediately attacked by the Soviet, ought to do so.”