GOOD WILL AMONG DEMOCRACIES.

Hawke's Bay Herald-Tribune, Issue 154, 17 July 1937, Page 4

GOOD WILL AMONG DEMOCRACIES.

While our current eable messages are so full of war and ruinours of war, of Fascism/ Nazism nad Communism, of dictatorships in being and in prospect, it is a relief to turn to an ai'ticle written shortly after the Coronation by Mr Winston Churchill, who, if soniething of a will-o-the-wisp in politics, is none the less a shrewd ohserver. In it he seeks to draw attention to the indications of a ruuch closer sympathy than hitherto bet^en the United States on the one hand, and the two hig European demoeracies of Great Britain and France. He starts out by s.aying that he c.annot recall any period when the good will hetween the two main branches of the English-speaking peoples was so pronounced. This, it is held, has not been the result of diplomacy Or negotiation. It has arisen naturally and almost unconscious" ly from an identity of outlook O f both peoples towards world problems in Europe and in the Far East. Nor is this haf" mony expressed only in smooth platitudes about the joys oi peace and the horrors of war. On the contrary, it is susluined ih the United States by a marked and reasoned approval of British and Erench institutions and policy, and an equally noticeable dislike of the tendencies of the dictatorruled countries. . As one who has been a comparatively reeent visitor to the Uttited States, Mr Churchill goes on to say that throughout that country there is a strong abhorrnece of the doctrines and practices both of Nazism and FaSCisitt, and a strong cUrrent * of sympathy With the countries, great attd small, whidh are faithfully erideavouring to preserve their parliamentary institutions and to maintain the conditions of law, freedom, and peaoe. In support of this oonvidtion, derived from personal contact with the American people, Mr Churchill quotes from speeches which were delivered by two highly placed and responsible representatives Of the United States in Europe, but of which only the barest outlines were cabled to us. In the first instaiice we have Mr James W. Gerard, a former United States AmbaSsador to London, who will also be remembered as having, until his own country hecame involved, staunchly upheld British interests in Berlin during the Great War. As head of the American delegation to the Coronation he spoke as follows: ' When ydU are armed, then armed Britain will be the greatest guarantee of peace on earth. . . . Wo in America —I taiulr in this one thing I can presume to speak for my country— are firntly determined on three thiflgs. FirSt, we are against war. Becondly, we are against any alliances; and, thirdly, we are against meddliug in the muddled affairs ef Europe. But we and you, the great British Empire, are bound by something more binding than alliances and treaties. We are bound togethet by xnutual trust, by mutual understanding, by a commoft desite for stability and peace, and especially by the feelilig that at this moinent, When Faseism on one side and Comuiuilism on the other, the three great demoeracies, Grreat Britain, France and the United States, stand as the sole hope of liboralism and of freedom of the world." .It waS only a few weeks earlier that Mr W. C. Bullitt, then just assuming office as United States Ambassador at * Pairs, Spoke there in Very much the" same strain: "We are not indif f erent to the state of those countries which catfy on the great traditiott of Western civilisation. . . . As children of the old civilisation of Westefn Europe we believe that there is such & thing as truth. It is only fair to point out that we did onr utmost to stay out of the war which broke out in 1914, that we stayed out of it fof three years, and that we shall stay out of any war which may break out in the future so long as God pefmits. We hope to stay out of wiaf, but we are entirely awaTe that there is always some possibility that Spme nation might be suff iciently reckless to drive us into war.' '

There dertainly has iiot been any occasion either before or since the Great War when the viewg of the United States Government have been so clearly aild AVeightily ekpressed upon European affairs. It would, however, as Mr Churchill points out, be a mistake to assume that these frieudly declarations imply any intention oii the part of the United States to beconie involved in the quarrels and combinations of Europe. On the contrary, tlie main inovement of opiniott in America is more than eVCr sct On avoiding eiitanglemCnts and keeping Otit of another world war. Fdr all that, there is ih these public sayings of these two fully acredited representatives of the United States quite sufficieht to give amhitious European dictators seeking to stir up international strife reason for seriobs thought, especially when consideratioU is given to the econoniid difficulties with which they are heset and the valu-' able assistajicC in getting ont of them for which they might liope froin a more friendly disposed United States.