The Wanganui Chronicle MONDAY, APRIL 18, 1938. BRITISH FOREIGN POLICY—AND NEW ZEALAND

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 80, Issue 90, 18 April 1938, Page 6

The Wanganui Chronicle MONDAY, APRIL 18, 1938. BRITISH FOREIGN POLICY—AND NEW ZEALAND

MEW ZEALAND is not getting a good advertisement in these days, and the situation is not a pleasant one Io view. Mr. Savage declares that he is at variance with the United King-

dom’s foreign policy. There is no complaint to be made against him on this score, because it is by no means easy to see thiough the various statements which have been made in England on the subject. The cardinal point of British policy at the moment is the determination to keep out of a war if it be at all possible. 1 hci e is also a clear indication that the British Government is unwilling to use the League of Nations where it might do so, prefening to deal with the parties concerned without the inherent difficulties of bringing an Assembly of various States into harmony and also into complete accord on many important points. On the point of keeping out of war, this should be in accord witl(, Mr. Savage’s feelings, for he has associated with him in his Cabinet men who preferred to “do their fighting behind prison bars” and therefore have remained unmarried, while married men manned the trenches. On the point of the use of the. League of Nations it is to be regretted that the League has not been the instrument for implementing an international policy, but it must be remembered that the surgeon is entitled to the choice of his instruments, not the patient.

In the world as it is to-day it is very difficult indeed to decide in any given instance which instrument to use. If all nations were members of the League, then to go outside it would definitely be wrong: but when the nations which are the chief cause of the troubles of the day are not members of the League, do not recognise its jurisdiction, and refuse to have anything to do with it. then if negotiations are to be conducted they must, perforce, be conducted through extra-League channels. It is not a matter of principle, it is a matter of expediency in meeting a situation for which British diplomacy has not been responsible. If Mr. Savage is opposed to the British Government for being practical in its handling of the international situation, then the people of New Zealand will not be behind him. It would be improper, however, to assume that Mr. Savage has taken up an attitude which was not in accord with the demands of the occasion, and no such assumption should be made.

Mr. Malcolm MacDonald’s assertion that Mr. Savage’s statements have been based on a report which was incomplete and and incorrect, and that subsequent full and accurate reports have removed the misunderstanding, is disturbing, to say the least. How came Mr. Savage to make statements on incomplete and incorrect reports? What steps did he take, if any, to verify the reports before he commented thereon? All of the facilities of the Government were available to him and it is to be expected that he will use them before issuing statements which arc based on incomplete and incorrect reports. It is for Mr. Savage to make his position clear, and for Mr. MacDonald to make his position clear to the British House of Commons. At the moment neither of the two has discharged his duty in this respect.