FOREIGN POLICY.

Evening Star, Issue 22465, 9 October 1936, Page 4

FOREIGN POLICY.

TO TIIB EDITOR. ■ Sir, —“ Union Jack ” concludes his trenchant criticism of my contribution to a discussion on Mew Zealand’s foreign policy at the Kailway W.E.A. class by advising me'to stick to facts and to leave fiction to .novelists. In expressing the viewpoint of the Movement Against War and Fascism that our Government, in order to assist in the maintenance of peace, should endeavour to alter the policy of the British Government, I stated that the threat to peace comes from the aggressive designs of the ruling groups in Japan, Italy, and Germany, and that these countries are in a position to menace the peace of the world because of the support given them by the National Government of Britain. This statement is based on facts, as I propose to show . Soon after the National Government took office in 1931 Japan invaded Manchuria. At Geneva Sir John Simon, the then Foreign Secretary, did all in his power to prevent the League of Nations exercising any of its powers against this aggressive action of Japan. In Parliament he declared against any policy of sanctions against Japan, but rather that “ we should view with sympathy and conciliation the situation that Japan was placed in.”- This-sup-port and encouragement given to Japanese expansionist aims has been a factor in bringing about the present tense situation in the East. The National Government encouraged Mussolini in his Abyssinian aims so long as they did not conflict with British 1 interests in Abyssinia. In December last, when the war reached a most critical stage and the Italian army was brought to a standstill for a short time, the National Government strove to avert an Italian defeat. There were two reasons for this. The effect of an Abyssinian victory would be incalculable among the peoples of Africa and India ; also the National Government, as the friend and supporter of reaction, did not wish to see Mussolini and his Fascist regime perish. Tho result was ■the infamous Hoare-Laval “ peace ” plan. The National Government was concerned only with the protecting _ of British interests without embarrassing Fascism. . The Nazi Government of Germany, whose leaders vaunt their desire

for war and their hatred of peaceful countries like the Soviet Union and I'Taucc, has carried out a huge rearmament programme with the active assistance of the British Government. Iliilov is in a position to carry out Ids openly-proclaimed war plans because he inn film support of Mr Stanley Baldwin. lu January, 1934, the National Government agreed to Hitler’s demand for heavy laud armaments. The German Government was thus able to secure the hitherto prohibited Gin gnus ami tanks. “The German claim to eipiality of rights in the matter of armaments cannot be resisted, and might not lo be resisted,” stated Sir John .Simon. 'When questions were raised in Parliament regarding the aero engines sent to Germany by the firm of Armstrong, Siddcley, he replied: “ Tim fulfilment of the order does not conllict with the terms of the relevant international instruments.” Hitler, having got tanks, aeroplanes, permission to rearm, and no measures adopted against him when he announced military conscription, quickly followed up his progress with the National Government, by demanding the right to build up a stronger navy. This was agreed ' to, and the Anglo-German Naval Treaty was signed in June, 193'). This will give Hitler a navy four times the size of that allowed by the Versailles Treaty. When the Scharnhorst was launched a few days ago General iilombcrg, Minister of War, stated that Lbo vessel was tho first fruit of the Anglo-German naval understanding. Financial assistance has also been given. In May, 1935, a loan to Germany for armament purposes was announced. That loan had the backing of the Bank of England. A new £BO,000,000 loan for the same purpose is now being negotiated. Thus it will be seen that the policy of tho National Government of Britain has been one of constant assistance to the enemies of peace, and to restrain Hitler, the chief warmonger, it is necessary to oppose Baldwin. The New Zealand Government, to change this policy, which can only result in war, must refuse to support it.—l am, etc., James Townlet. October 9.

[No summary of five years’ history in so short a space, made on behalf of a propagandist body and necessarily selective, is worth considering. Facts that bear against the genera! argument are ignored in every case dealt with; It is too much to say that the Nazi leaders “ vaunt their desire for war,” and the inviolability of the Treaty of Versailles, which most Pacifists condemn, has been impossible, by common consent. —Ed. E.S.]