The Dominion. THURSDAY, JANUARY 17, 1935. THE SAAR DECISION

Dominion, Volume 28, Issue 96, 17 January 1935, Page 8

The Dominion. THURSDAY, JANUARY 17, 1935. THE SAAR DECISION

* It will be generally agreed that the most satisfying feature of the Saar plebiscite was the decisive weight of the majority vote, Ihe electorate was privileged to declare whether it favoured German sovereignty or French, or a continuance of its present political status as a ward of the League of Nations. Judging by the result the most significant aspect is the decisive defeat of France. The figures demonstrate as a fact beyond .dispute'that while the electors overwhelmingly voted for German sovereignty, the second preference was for League of Nations control rather than French. Whether the electors have voted wisely is a question to be determined by their own experience in the future, but what has interested the rest of Europe, and Great Britain, is whether the decision would.be of such a determinative character as would definitely remove the Saar problem from the list of Europe’s political irritants. The question has been convincingly answered. All that remains is for the necessary formalities involved in the transfer of the territory to German sovereignty to be completed, a process which, happily, has been facilitated by a previous,agreement between the parties concerning the conditions of the transfer. Hence the result of the plebiscite is a large contribution to the peace of Europe. Germany has obtained what for national and economic reasons she has long and earnestly hoped for, and France has submitted with good grace to a decision which her own statesmen must have foreseen was inevitable. It may be argued that Germany owed her victory to her intensive methods of propaganda prior to the plebiscite. Having regard to the issue at stake it would have .been surprising indeed had either country taken no steps to organise its following. But the very fact that such 1 a substantial vote was cast in favour of remaining under the protection of the League of Nations discounts the suggestions made that terrorist methods were employed by the German organisers. Whatever might have been possible in that connection was frustrated by the arrangement, to which both countries readily agreed, for the policing of the electorate by an international force before and during the plebiscite, and the control-of the election itself by independent authority. ‘ • - The guarantee of peace which has been gained by the decision is further enhanced by the previous inclination of the parties to come to a friendly understanding under the aegis of a League committee with Signor Aloisi as chairman, as to the terms upon which Germany would resume control of the territory should the decision be in her favour. Under the Peace Treaty provisions Germany, in such an event, was to pay France a sum to be decided upon for the transfer to her of the Saar mines. Under the settlement arrived at’ on December 3 last, France is to receive 900,000,000 francs, part of which is to be paid in coal deliveries to the amount of (11,000,000 tons. The payments are to be spread over a term so as not to be burdensome. • On the political side, all Saarlanders arc guaranteed full political and social rights, and, for a specified period (believed to be for one year), protection against persecution or reprisals of any sort regardless of race, religion, or political beliefs. The publication of these provisions before the plebiscite went far to allay apprehensions as to the consequences likely to happen to the minority voters. Further, the result of the negotiations produced a favourable impression in Germany. “It is unquestionably the result of a profound improvement in relations,” remarked the Deutsche Allgemeinc Zeitung. “The French delegation,” it added, “was wholly reasonable in its attitude.” Taking' a broad view of the situation, therefore, it would be reasonable to anticipate that the Saar decision, and its consequential settlements, will go far to improve the general prospects of peace in Europe. For this satisfying result British diplomacy at Geneva is entitled to a major portion of the credit. It was on Britain’s initiative that the terms of settlement were discussed before the plebiscite instead of after, and that an international force was organised to police the region. Had neither of these two precautionary measures bean taken the actual election might have left the Saar situation still in a provocative state instead of representing as it does an important contribution to peace, and an impressive demonstration of the efficacy of friendly negotiation.