The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. TUESDAY, APRIL 26, 1927. BRITAIN NO PARTISAN.

Hokitika Guardian, 26 April 1927, Page 2

The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. TUESDAY, APRIL 26, 1927. BRITAIN NO PARTISAN.

*j| During a remit debate in the Comv, 111011 son the Chinese situation, a pro's ininent Lahour member asked for an j assurance that the British Governnient would continue to preserve comI plete neutrality in regard to any rival parties that might arise in the Nationalist camp. It is a rather curious fiict, notes an exchange, that the Labour members who are so anxious to r insist upon Britain’s neutrality—as between Moderates and Bolsheviks—were a few days ago denouncing the Government for not recognising the Nationalists as the dominant party in China and siding definitely with them. The 1 fact that a cleavage is non' taking place between two sections of the Xationali ist party, is sufficient proof that the J decision of Sir A. Chamberlain not to treat the Nationalist party as if it already represented the whole of China was inspired hy genuine political wisdom. But quite apart from this aspect of the question it is important to note the character of Cantonese policy and the methods that the Nationalists Have pursued. The joint Note presented by the Great Powers (including the United States) to the Cantonese Government this week charges the Nationalists with deliberately organising and perpetrating a long series of outrages and atrocities at Nanking; and the Powers very naturally demand not only reparation for these injuries hut some guarantee of good conduct for the future. Surely not even Labour members in search of a missile to fling at the British Foreign Minister can deny the necessity for urging their claims. It is all very well to talk about the just aspirations of the Nationalists and China’s claim to freedom and independence. In any ease the Powers have a right to insist that all parties in China ' shall pay some respect to the principles of international law; and it is futile t to think of recognising as virtual rulers of China the unscrupulous and ferocious tyranny now established at Canton. Of course, nothing of this 1 means that Nationalism—the desire for ' autonomy and the demand for freedom and independence—is in itself I evil. On the contrary the Nationalist ‘ movemet in modern times has been chiefly responsible for tlie progress and uplifting of humanity at large. But the fact remains that the spread of Nationalist doctrines among people who have so far had no exporience of the difficulties of self government must inevitably give rise to complex and a dangerous problems. Egypt and India are certainly cases in point, and

tlic Amorionns are now facing tlie same sort of cliflit-nit v in I lie Philippines. Tile leaders of the Nationalist 111 ;vcimoit there tire publicly inviting aliention to the successes of tlie Cantonese, tile! are drawing the natural inference that if (lie Chinese have the right to govern tlieniselves so also have the Filipinos’ with the implied suggestion that as force may : ueceed in one on;- 1 it may he eijiiailv o el'ttl in the other. Vied so Washington will speedily lie called upon to face a Filipino campaign for “freedom from the supervision of the United States.’’