TRADE WITH RUSSIA

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 19858, 4 June 1927, Page 6

TRADE WITH RUSSIA

Some few days ago, the Home Government’s critics made a great point of the alleged £10,000,000 loss of trade which would follow the expulsion of the Soviet’s revolution emissaries from Britain. They fell silent when it was pointed out that Bolshevik activities in China had deprived Britain of trade worth £80.000,000 annually. Then arose the Chancellor of the Exchequer who gave them a few more trade facts, pointing out that British workers, under the influence of their so-called leaders, had lost 87,000,000 days’ wages on account of strike troubles during the past seven years.

Since then, these critics have been absolutely dumb on the question of British trade and trade loss. But now comes another of their friends to supply them with some more dud ammunition. M. Guerus, Soviet Trade Commissioner, on his expulsion from Canada (the “Big Dominion” has also resolved to rid itself of the “Red” element), announces in an I-told-you-so voice that Russia wants to trade with friendly countries and will now give its business to the United States instead of to Britain. So here is material for more talk about trade loss! It so happens, however, that the United States is no more friendly to the Soviet than Britain is. Much less so, in fact, for the United States has never recognised the Soviet and has consistently refused to hare any relations at all with it. So, if Russian trade is to depend upon friendliness, M. Guerus’s talk falls flat. It is quite true, as stated by him, that certain banking and commercial interests in America desire to see Russian relations resumed. But it is also true—and this he omitted to mention—that an even stronger body of commercial opinion is opposed to such a course and that the latter has the American Government’s backing.

It is, of course, quite possible that the prospect of securing the former British trade with Russia, such as it was, may tempt the United States to a sudden access of friendship. But a friendship established on a strictly cash basis and with so tricky a gang as the Soviet would be such an insecure thing that one can hardly imagine even the most persistent dollarchaser desiring it. But, even so, Britain will find herself better off for discarding it.