TALKS IN PARIS ON THE FUTURE OF EUROPE FAIL

Wanganui Chronicle, 4 July 1947, Page 5

TALKS IN PARIS ON THE FUTURE OF EUROPE FAIL

Russian Rejection of the Marshall Plan Received 11 p.m. PARIS, July 3 Russian rejection of the plan to unite Europe sufficiently to permit that continent to benefit from its resources and recover from the ravages of war as propounded by the United Staves Secretary of State (Mr. George Marshall), has meant the virtual failure of the Paris talks between the Foreign Ministers of Britain, France and the Soviet, in an effort to find a means of implementing the plan.

The fifth session of the conference took place yesterday, when Mr. Bevin (Britain) and M. Bidault (France) hcth condemned the statement made the day before by the Soviet Foreign Minister (Mr. Molotov).

No more “Save Europe" talks are to take place between the three Ministers, but the British and French Ministers are to meet again shortly to consider the consequences of failure. Mr. Molotov,in his statement to the conference, said the British and French proposals would lead to Britain and France and the countries following them separating themselves from the other European States, thus dividing Europe into two groups of States: “The Soviet Government considers it necessary to caution Britain and France against the consequences of such action,” he said. Commenting on the Paris failure "The Times,” in a leader, says: "Mr. Molotov has bluntly rejected a proposal that the whole of Europe should do together what the countries of Western Europe must now perforce undertake separately. The statement issued after the final meeting last night, in which he blamed Britain and France for a break-down, reads as a complete inversion of the

argument presented by the facts. Responsibility for the division of Europe cannot rest with those who have sought Io enlist the whole Continent in a collective effort of self-help; nor is it possible to follow the logic that converts voluntary co-operation into an invasion of sovereignty. “Britain and France need no warning of the consequences attending a division of Europe. France herself has been conspicuous for the energy and consistency with which she has recisted that division, but now the choice has been between an acceptance or veto on the action favoured. It is safe .to say by the real Wishes of all the imaller European nations, and persistence in the new attempt to set lecovery under way, the Soviet offers no alternative, no counter-pro-posal that* could, in some different way, put Europe in a position to prolit permanently by the unique capital resources ot;the United States. With the Russian, refusal to participate in European planning, the immediate and urgent task is now clearly defined. It is for Britain and France to take the initiative left with them, and to frame, with the other nations of Europe willing to help, proposals that will accord with the Marshall offer. The first step is a conference to be convened by the British and French Governments.”