The Gisborne Herald. WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED “THE TIMES.” WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 1939 PEACE NEGOTIATIONS

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20095, 15 November 1939, Page 6

The Gisborne Herald. WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED “THE TIMES.” WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 1939 PEACE NEGOTIATIONS

Germany is expected to reply to-day | t 0 the Peace appeal issued by the | Queen of the Netherlands and the j King oi the Belgians, but it may be ! taken for granted that nothing which | might be said will affect the present I situation in the slightest degree. In ! fact > the peace appeal itself, although | *t was unquestionably actuated by the j highest possible motives, was a futile I

proceeding because no negotiations which might be entered into with the present leaders of Germany could possibly lead to a durable peace. Discussions might be opened, as was suggested, and Herr Hitler would doubtless be found willing to give categorical assurances that he had no aggressive intentions. But obviously no such assurances could be accepted in the face of the long list of broken promises which has characterised the whole of his political career. What other course is open, then, except to continue the war until, as Mr. Chamberlain insisted from the outset, the peace of Europe is redeemed from the perpetually-recurring fear of German aggression, so as to enable the people of Europe to preserve their independence and their liberties. No negotiated peace at this stage would attain that objective and however much the Allies and the smaller States of Europe might desire the end of the war they are compelled to realise that peace to-day would be nothing better than what M. Lebrun has called a precarious truce.

Belgium and Holland, in particular, should appreciate this position. They have good cause to know just how serious the Nazi menace really is and how unreliable are any pledges given by Herr Hitler. Significantly enough, even while making the plea for peace they have demonstrated their own distrust of Germany, for, despite repeated assurances from Berlin, both countries have taken active steps to a'epel a possible invasion. It seems probably, indeed, that they are profiting from past experience in other parts of Europe and feel that Hitler is never more likely to attack than when he is seeking to create a false sense of security by giving assurances of pacific intentions. There is reason to believe that Hitler has now lost any opportunity of a successful drive through the lowlands, but if he is to launch an offensive where else can he move? France’s Maginot Line prevents an advance to the west and Russia has cut off any possible approach to the east or to the Balkans. Germany, thanks to her own conduct, finds herself properly encircled and since she still adheres to her policy of expansion she must attempt to break through somewhere, and this, no doubt, explains the anxiety of her small neighbours.

It is necessary, however, that they should remember the fate of other small States which Germany has attempted to seal. There can be no real peace without justice, and if Belgium and Holland are to-day prepared to acquiesce in injustices to Poland and Czechoslovakia, in particular, they would have no real ground to complain if, in the future, they were themselves the victims of equally unjust treatment. Britain and France, as has been made abundantly clear, entered the war only when the limit of compromise had been reached and when no other course was open. They are fighting solely with the object of establishing a principle and unless that principle is established, Holland and Belgium, among others, will be in constant danger of the very threats which they now fear. Their real interests, therefore, lie, not in securing a cessation of hostilities which would carry no effective guarantee of lasting peace, but in supporting the cause to which the Allies have pledged themselves. In other words, the best method of achieving the object which Holland and Belgium have in mind is to support the Allied cause rather than to attempt to persuade them to abandon .it. That there is no possibility of such a step has been made clear from the moment Britain and France entered the war, and their policy has been reaffirmed by the replies of His Majesty and the President of France. Neither Britain nor France, it is true, has closed the door to peace negotiations, but each has made it clear that there is not the remotest possibility of peace being accepted on the basis of the status quo and without effective guarantees against further German aggression. There cannot even be negotiation with the present German leaders, much less acceptance of any agreement which they might be prepared to entertain. When the people of Germany—who are as much opposed to war as those of any other country—are enabled once more to dictate the policy of their Government instead of having to submit to dictation there will be prospects of real peace, but until then there can be no alternative other than to continue the war. To compromise now would be to acquiesce in the Nazi

policy of aggression and domination, to leave the robber in possession of his spoils, and peace on this basis would be neither honourable nor just. It matters not in the least, then, what reply Herr Hitler might send to the peace appeal, for there can be no real peace while he is in a position to speak for Germany. When the people of Germany can speak for themselves it will be another matter, but it is to be feared that much water must run under the bridges before that time arrives and until then the Allies can only continue on the course which they have set and from which there can be no deviation.