The Dominion SATURDAY, APRIL 26, 1919. A FALSE STEP

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 181, 26 April 1919, Page 6

The Dominion SATURDAY, APRIL 26, 1919. A FALSE STEP

j It is evident that the crisis which | has arisen at the 'Peacc Conference ■ over the Adriatic settlement holds very sei|io.its possibilities. As matters stand it is the only redeeming feature of the affair that Italy has so obviously taken a false stop that .; it seems reasonable to hope that on second thought she will retract arid . so restore harmony in the Conference deliberations.' Standing alone, President Wilson's- denunciation of Italy's Adriatic claims looked extremely ill-advised—the more so since, according to the Italian Prime Minister, negotiations were in progress at the time "on a compromise which might have been accepted.'' It is now established, however, that the President's declaration was a protest against Italy's refusal to withdraw her demand for Fiume, a city and seaport, it must be said,; to 'which- she has no-'just claim either on racial grounds or on those, of strategic necessity. Something like.half the.population of Fiume, it is true,, consists of Italians,, but as a seaport .'tho town is an essential outlet for the Slav territory of Croatia, in which it stands, and for. other territories further inland. Fiume is the only sea- ■ port in Hungary as that' country was constituted prior to the collapse of the Hapsbnrg Empire, and PRESIDENT. Wilson is .on. unassailable ground in urging that it must be set aside as an-outlet-for Hungary, Bohemia,; Rumania, and the new States of the Jugo-Slav group.' Italy ■ herself freely recognised the justice, of . such .an. arrangement when, in April, 1915, just before she entered the war, she concluded the Treaty of London, to which she is now appealing. This document, to which Britain, France, and Russia were the other contracting parties, gave Italy (besides tho Trentino and Istria) "the province of Dalmatia in its present frontiers,", and Valona, with some adjacent territory, but specifically named Fiume amongst the Adriatic territories to be. included in Croatia, Serbia, and Montftflegro, Italy apparently bases her tiaim to Fiume on possession— lilt. Lloyd George points out. in a statement cabied to-aay that she occupied tho city without the sanction or approval of France and. Britain —but this is emphatically not a case ' in which possession is nine points of the law. The only verdict, possible on the faots is that Italy's attempt, to obtain.Fiume is a violation of.theprinciples she and. her Allies are pledged to observe in settling conditions of peace. .This. is the more to.be regretted since it would be quite unjust to'' pass any such sweeping judgment Won her Adriatic claims as a whole. Even those who are least inclined to admit these claims -are to recognise that they do not wholly, lack a foundation in'reason and justice. In demanding the province of Dalmatia Italy is laying claim to ; a territory in which the bulk-of the population is Slav, but tho excuse advanced on her behalf is that possession of the Dalmatian "bridgehead", is essential to enable her, to organise, a secure naval defence.of the: Adriatic. Some emphasis, is -laid also upon an historical claim, based upon tho fact that Dalmatia, was held throughout twenty, centuries, first by Rome, and then by \ Venice; and also upon tlie existence in- tho province of nuclei of people of Italian nationality,, who are said to demand redemption. It has been said by ah Italian naval authority that the guarantees of the Treaty of London (including possession of Dalmatia) "aro essential. to the strategic security of the na,tion. . And as such they are inalienable and do not admit of compromise or barter." The broad facts of the naval strategic position in the Adriatic are familiar. It is not,in. dispute that so long as she had to face a powerful naval competitor in that sea, Italy's position, from the defensive standpoint, could not he mado reasonably sccure unless sho obtained a strong foothold on the Dalmatian coast. That fact justified the provisions of the .Treaty of London which have been cited, but since the treaty was concluded the whole position has been transformed by the disruption of tho Austro-Hungarian Empire and the annihilation of its naval force.

In her demand for security, though not necessarily in regard" to the means by which she hopes to attain it, Ita-ty undoubtedly- is entitled to all possible sympathy 1 and support from her Allies Her general claim is supported not only by considerations of, international justice, but by respect for her' noble record in the war. Shq entered the conflict at a time-when Allied prospects were dark, persisted indomitably in spite of terrible calamities, and from first to last drew freely upon resources by no means ample in upholding the common causc. Her Allies assuredly are more than ready to recognise' that she. is entitled to all the security that' international unjustly framed, can give her. _ But in order to justify the continued _ assertion of her former claims it is evidently necessary that Italy should show that she is still exposed to the danger of naval attack. in the Adriatic,_ and this she Jias failed to do. . It is true, now as formerly that the conditions of coast-lines and harbours in the Adriatic allow of her being taken at a serious disadvantage by a competing naval Power. But it should be quite practicable now to so adjust matters that these conditions can never be utilised to her detriment, and-in that case her claim to Dalmatia might well'ho .allowed to lapse. Italian spokesmewpaturally profess scepticism in regard to the possibility of permanently eliminating naval competition "tin the Adriatic, and argue alwfhafl Italy is being asked to 'dispense! with safeguards such its other Allied Powers are careful to retain for ttyir own benefit. In regard 1 to the latter point it has been instanced that Australia and New Zealand demanded and secured the German Pacific islands on strategic grounds. Such arguments do not entirely lack weight, but it is to be said that the enemy Power has been as definitely eliminated in the Adriatic territories as in the Pacific Islands, and furthermore, that in dealing with these islands the aim is not to create strategic bases, but to prevent their creation. The strongest ground of opposition to Italy's Adriatic claims is that, as Mb. Lloyd Gbojigb observes in bis statement on behalf of Britain and France, they are opposed to her own best interests. If tlio' League of Nation's is successfully constituted Italy can as

well make herself .sccure 011 the Adriatic with her own fleet recluecd and competition eliminated as by maintaining a strong fleet and creating naval strongholds on the Dalmatian coast. She is entitled, of course, to the firmest possible international guarantee against Ul9 toleration of conditions which would make naval attack on her Adriatic coast possible, and such a guarantee would make her far more secure than the acquisition of territory inhabited by people of_ alien race, whose national aspirations undoubtedly would give rise to friction a-s time went on. The present outlook is troubled, and it is obvious that much move than the fate of. the Adriatic _ territories is at stake. It is unlikely that there is any foundation for alarmist^ reports of impending military action by Italy in support of her claims, but such a breach as is threatened at the Peace Conference would lend inevitably to endanger- the prospect of establishing general, peace on a sccurc and enduring basis.' The interests of the whole world, her own included, demand that Italy should retrace her steps.