The Dominion. THURSDAY, MAY 11, 1944. THE CONFERENCE AND AFTER

Dominion, Volume 37, Issue 191, 11 May 1944, Page 4

The Dominion. THURSDAY, MAY 11, 1944. THE CONFERENCE AND AFTER

Many nations, including the Axis Powers, have been impressed by the unity of thought and action that has been demonstrated by the self-governing units of the British Commonwealth during the long, exacting years of war. There has been no sign of any weakening, no evidence of any real differences of opinion and the very fact that, during the fifth year of war, its leaders have met to exchange views regarding post-war policy seems to have created a deep impression. A leading American journal last week said that “the London conference has demonstrated that it (the British Empire) has become the freest and most liberal international organization in history.” It went on to state that although it had been the “constant object of envy and attacks it had weathered all vicissitudes and survived every crisis, including the greatest in its existence —the present

war.” Although the deliberations have been conducted behind closed d oors —thus giving the members the wider latitude of informal exchanges of opinion—the necessity for keeping the peoples of the respective countries as fully informed as circumstances would permit has been clearly recognized. There is something distinctly encouraging in this picture of the leaders of British communities, far apart geographically, meeting to discuss matters of'mutual importance, an importance heightened by the fact that together they must form a strong stabilizing influence in the post-war world. Such subjects as the creation of a secretariat to ensure closer relationship can be discussed without fear of causing misapprehension because a world at war knows that, as far as this conference is concerned, there are no territorial ambitions to be served, and that the maximum unity between the units of the British Commonwealth will not constitute any menace to any nation, large or small. Possibly the best angle from which to view the proceedings of the conference in London is to regard it as a means of ensuring, during the difficult years that must follow the war, the same strength of unity that has made such a vital contribution to the cause of the United Nations. But to establish that upon an unshakable basis there must be added to the unity of the leaders the greater unity of the peoples. The strength of the British Commonwealth, demonstrated in such an impressive manner since September, 1939, has come from the singleness of, purpose and unity of action of its peoples. It probably is correct to'assume that the publicity given to the proceedings, and to the statements of the members* has been due to a realization that the full , value of any decisions reached, the implementing of any mutual policies, will be dependent upon their endorsement by British citizens. It will have been noted that the Prime Minister of the Dominion, when discussing the question of post-war, economic collaboration, said that any plans put forward would be “critically examined by the New Zealand Government and Parliament. If that is done, then there will be an opportunity for public opinion to crystalize and, possibly, to influence the trend of the decisions reached. There was a time when conferences such as those now being held in London were regarded as matters primarily, if not solely, concerning the British units. Today they must be viewed against the under background of international collaboration. There has come, almost imperceptibly, a great change. The representatives of British selfgoverning countries have not met to consider matters that concern them alone, but to examine ways and means by which they can make a united contribution toward world recovery. Their combined resources and potentialities ensure added strength. They have been effective during the prolonged test of “the greatest crisis in its existence —the present war” and afford good grounds for confidence whatever the years immediately ahead may bring. But they are the material things. The real strength must always be a unity of spirit, co-operation, broad based upon the people’s will.