GRAVE MISTAKE

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 88, Issue 124, 26 May 1944, Page 5

GRAVE MISTAKE

I NOT RECOGNISING FRENCH i NATIONAL COMMITTEE DOUBJS ABOUT ARMED LEA* UE OF NATIONS Recd. 6 p.m. Rugby, May 24. Two outstanding features i*n the debate in the House of Commons, following Mr. Churchill’s speech, were demands for recognition of the French National Committee and doubts about the possibilities of a post-war armed League of Nations. Mr. Harold Nicholson National Labour) said we tre e ?d France as a full ally on the battle.ield, but, ignored her in the diplomatic field. It was a [grave error of policy. Captain Grey (Liberal) believed I that if we recognised the National .Committee, the common sense and patriotism of the French people would ensure the establishment of democracy in France. Mr. R. A. Carey (Conservative) urged that the old ties of friendship and understanding with France be restored to the full. On the subject of the League of Nations, Lord Dunglass (Conservative) emphasised that we must not neglect our own security. He insisted that there was not the necessary minimum of confidence on which a big international organisation would be built, and he urged that if our own interests conflicted with world interI ests. we must stand by our own. Mr. Pethick Lawrence retorted from an Opposition bench that the test of our own interests was whether they conflicted with world interests. If they did. they could not survive in the long run. He would like to see the new League with new powers added strength and more universal membership. The debate was adjourned. AMERICAN COMMENT ARE ALLIES UNITED? Reed. 9.10 p.m. New York, May *25. "Mr. Churchill’s speech in the House of Commons could not avoid the weakness Inherent in the tangled issues which accumulate as victory begins to dawn,” says the Herald-Tribune, editoriallv. “Mr. ChurchiH; in repeating a stock of never very logical excuses for refusing General de Gaulle full recognition, seemed simply to be following President Roosevelt’s obscure policy, just as the State Department seems to be following an equally obscure policy to that of Downing Street, towards the reactionary Spanish dictatorship. This is not the hour for needless criticism, but. because victory may be near, it becomes a duty to insist that, not even in tense hours of military decision, should there be any compromise with any wrong whicn can cloud the great issue, or confound our true friends." The New York Times says: "Mr. Churchill is fully entitled to a candid expression of British views on the problems of war and peace, just as Stalin is entitled to express the Russian. and President Roosevelt the American views, but if each great Power answers questions separately at this stage, at what stage are we to have joint definitions of policy? Mr. Churchill speaks on specific points which can be settled only by agreement. Does he speak also for Moscow and Washington? Surely the time has come when the three great Powers must speak with one voice." Commenting on Mr. Churchill's speech at a Press conference at Washington, Mr. E. R. Steetlnius, Undersecretary of State, said: "The British Prime Minister's remarks on policy towards France were generally in line with lhe thinking of the American Government, with which Mr Churchill is thoroughly familiar.” | Referring' to Mr. Churchill's view .that. Yugoslavia should he invited 'under Marshal Tito, Mr. Stettinius i said lie did not know at present what 1 the American position would be. He j refused to comment on Mr. Churchill's j remarks on the Russo-Polish situation. However, diplomatic circles m Washington, says the New York Times, are of opinion that the reported arrival in Moscow of a delegation from Poland might be used by the Kremlin as a device for furthering efforts Io reach accommodation with the Polish people, through encouraging changes in the exile Government, or otherwise.