A FRENCH VIEW OF THE EMPIRE

Dominion, Volume 28, Issue 89, 9 January 1935, Page 8

A FRENCH VIEW OF THE EMPIRE

Of contemporary journalists writing of the events and developments of their own day, M. Andre Siegfried is admittedly a fi ont-iafu observer and analyst. Added to this he has the Fi enchman s capacity for logical thinking. He is not content with seeing 'and "noting; he seeks to discover the meaning of events and developments, their present tendency, and their ultimate effects. Among other things he is immensely interested in the British-Empire, which, he observes in an interesting article in the Nineteenth Century and After, is now in its third phase. First, there was the Colonial Empire: then t.re Second Empire, based on the application of the principle of but not independence: the Third Empire, an association of sovereign nations, is the creation of the Statute of Westminster, by .which “Empire” was subtly changed for ‘‘Commonwealth, a very diffeient thing, M. Siegfried remarks. . ’ ' , . . . r iTo the foreigner the most interesting question arising fiom this development is the future relationship of the British Commonwealtn to Europe. Great Britain, the senior partner, has European connections which cannot easily be cut even if she were so willing—, connections which are political, commercial and cultural. But the Dominions are essentially extra-European, and prone to react unfavomably to any line of British policy in Europe likely to entangle-the Commonwealth as a whole in commitments involving the possibility of war. Yet, as M. Siegfried points out, Britain is a necessaiy element of the European order. “Without England as a a clearing-house,” he says, “we, as Europeans, could not have been, and certainly'could not remain, the economic centre of the world. i.i’.s suggests the question, what would happen if Britain were seiiotisly defeated in some great'world war? Would the Dominions gravitate politically and economically toward Europe, as they do now thiougn Britain, or find a new centre of gravity, such as America? these questions lead M. Siegfried to the conclusion that as things aic at present Europe cannot do without the British Commonwealth, and Britain herself cannot do without Europe. ' “This intermediary position of Britain,” he suggests, ‘is afterall of her greatness. She would not be true to hei .destiny if she agreed to be drawn into a closed Continental system, qi it she entered a closed Imperial community, parted from the Continent of Europe.” That is a very' sound diagnosis of a problem of Bijtisji Imperial policy that can .only be solved by the genius of the Britisn people for adapting themselves to the constant process of change which is taking place within their Empire.