The Wanganui Chronicle. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 1945. THE RIDDLE WHICH IS RUMANIA

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 89, Issue 215, 11 September 1945, Page 4

The Wanganui Chronicle. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 1945. THE RIDDLE WHICH IS RUMANIA

are being voiced in Russia that American and British pressure is being applied to Rumania. This is the basis of an article published in “Izvestia,” Russia’s semi-official newspaper. The situation is not so simple as that and Russia cannot be depicted as a simple soul and an injured innocent. Russia has been bringing too much pressure to bear upon Rumania, in contravention of the provision of the agreement reached by America, Britain and Russia at Yalta Conference. “The Russian standpoint is clear,” declares “Izvestia.” “It is based firmly on the principle of not permitting interference in the internal affairs of Rumania.” So far so good, but Russia herself must be careful Hot io interfere, for the Yalta Conference contained this provision:—“The three Governments will jointly assist the people of any European liberated State, or former Axis satellite, where in their judgment conditions require them to form interim governmental authorities broadly representative of all democratic elements in the population.” In a country such as Rumania, where the political situation never has been stable, it is not to be expected that after some years of enforced collaboration with the Axis a Government comprised of all the democratic elements could be set up. Even were that task achieved it would then be difficult for these hitherto suppressed parties to work together in harmony. In Rumania both tasks have proved to be very difficult of attainment: Government has succeeded Government. On August 23 of last year, at the request of the King, General Sanateseu formed a Government of National Union which was intended to serve as a provisional administration. The following political leaders were included in the Cabinet with rank of Minister of State:—M. Manin, Leader of the National Peasant Party; M. Dinu Bratianu, Leader of the National Liberal Party; M. Petrescu, Loader of the Socialist Party; M. Patrascanu, Leader of the Communist Party. At October 4 it was decided, at meetings of Government parties, to carry out a drastic purge of all persons responsible for what happened between 1940 and 1944 and also responsible for Rumanian foreign policy during the period 1938 to 1940. .The pace of the purge, however, was not such as to satisfy the Communists, and on October 8 a decree was promulgated authorising the dismissal of all public employees who had served foreign interests or an organisation of dictatorship. Other disputes arose and on October 12 the Four-Party Democratic Bloc-was dissolved. General Sanateseu formed another Government on October 12 with M. Brozea of the Ploughman’s Front as Vice-Premier. This Government issued no statement of policy, but described itself as “the first political Government since the fall of the Dictatorship.” After the first meeting of the Cabinet, it was announced that the policy was “close co-operation with the representatives of the Allies, particularly with the Soviet High Command.” The internal situation was, however, far from quiet. Armed bands existed, the Hungarians in Transylvania were naturally restive, and the members of the Iron Guard, the terrorist organisation, were being rounded up. On November 27 it was reported that about 100 leading Rumanian politicians were arrested. M. Vyshinsky, Deputy People’s Commissar for Foreign Affairs, arrived from Moscow in Bucharest on November 8. His chief concern was to sec to the stricter and more speedy enforcement of the armistice terms, and especially the more speedy return of Soviet property. M. Vyshinsky placed the question of restitution in the forefront of Russo-Rumanian relations. In December General Sanateseu’s Government, resigned owing to friction concerning the fulfilling of the armistice terms. General Radescu formed a new Government. The Russians complained that the Rumanians were dallying, with failing to keep their word in returning Soviet equipmentsteam boilers, machine tools, and tractors included—found in her possession, that the purge was not complete, and that members of the Iron Guard remained at large. These complaints continued right up to July, but the Rumanian case seems to be worth examining. It may be that Rumania has some degree of justification not admitted by the Russians.

Writing in the “Sunday Times” of July 22 Archibald Gibson, after visiting Bucharest, stated that “the Russians seem to be driving unduly hard terms. For instance, by September next Rumania has to hand over to the Russians nearly 1.500,000 head of cattle. So far she has delivered some 530,000 and contends that account should he taken of the 597,000 head of cattle which the Russian Army commandeered as they advanced through Rumania last autumn. The total is about what Rumania’s 15,000,000 people eat and three times what they normally export in one year. Russian demands for other products for the upkeep of the Red Army are on the same scale and sometimes include items like 10,000 pairs of silk stockings or a wagonload of cocoa which Rumania does not grow and cannot now import. The Russians have also removed as spoils of war 40.000 tons of oilfield equipment, much of which belonged to British and American companies.” The situation in Rumania calls for calm discussion and general adjustment by Rumania, and Russia as well as by others concerned, but the untimely publication by “Izvcstie.” of a critical article points rather to someone in Moscow having an uneasy conscience.