THIRD INTERNATIONAL

Evening Post, Volume CVIII, Issue 137, 6 December 1929, Page 11

THIRD INTERNATIONAL

PERNICIOUS PROPAGANDA

DEBATE IN HOUSE 'OF LORDS

United Press Association- Bj Electric Tel«-

Eraph—Copjrlsht.

LONDON, 4th December.

In the House of Lords the Earl of Birkcnhead, in moving that the diplomatic recognition of the Soviet at present was undesirable, pointed out that he alone was responsible for the motion.

It was alleged, he said, that resumption would have been justified on the ground of trade. The United States, however, in no way indifferent to commercial advantage, resolutely declined to recognise the Soviet Government, which had not showed the slightest intention of doing what Mr. Henderson described as the condition, precedent to full resuniptiin. -:

Nobody knew authoritatively whether the Soviet claimed to have "power to control the Third International. Instructions had been sent out with the object of inflaming, revolution among the South African natives months after the discussions with Mr. Henderson had been opened. If the Soviet had no power to* prevent these, where was the advantage of resuming relations with it? If it had the power, but refused to exercise it, why fool ourselves into the belief that stable and honourable relations could be established with such people? These attempts made to stir up a revolution in part of the Empire would have been impossible without the assent or complicity of the Soviet. Ever since Mr. Henderson's conversations with M. Dovgalevsky there had been an aggravation of all Eussia's anti-British activities, yet in the face of this it was _ understood the Government was continuing its resumption policy. The Archbishop of Canterbury took the view that the Soviet's whole principles—political, moral, and religious-—' were such that Britain could in nowise participate therein.

NO NEED FOR RECOGNITION^

Lord Mclehett said that the Third International was the master of the Moscow Government. It was carrying on a world war more deadly than if carried on'by guns, shells, and poison gas. British business people were capable of dealing with Russian trade without diplomatic recognition. Viscount Cecil regarded recognition as an important step to world peace. He said that it was a gross exaggeration to describe the Bolshevik propaganda as more deadly than war. Its most striking feature was its utter futility.

Lord Melchett said that Soviet propaganda was responsible for the troubles m China, India, Egypt, and Palestine. Our own general strike was directly due to Bolshevik propaganda jn Glasgow. "What about, the Communist Sunday schools?"

Viscount Cecil: "They are on the verge of collapse." Lord Parmoor, replying to the debate, said that ' though the United Sstates had not recognised Russia diplomatically, there was an American commercial mission in Moscow and a Russian mission in Washington. '• Soviet propaganda had failed absolutely throughout the Empire, not owing to the breakmg-off of relations, but because of tho common-sense of the British democracy.

Lord Bivkenhead: "I am convinced by A riscount Cecil's and Lord Parmoor's speeches that my previous views must be entirely wrong—that Russian propaganda either is wholly innocuous or positively beneficial to Britain. lam not sure whether we ought not to subsidise it."

MOTION CARRIED.

Lord Bii-kenhead's motion was car•ied by 43 votes to 21. •