BRITISH INTERESTS FIRST!

Hokitika Guardian, 10 June 1927, Page 4

BRITISH INTERESTS FIRST!

THE TRUTH ABOUT OUR FOREIGN . POLICY. (By CHARLES PETRIE in the London Weekly.)

One would have thought that the foreign policy of Great Britain had been .sufficiently clearly defined of recent years, not only in words but in deeds, to prevent the rise of any misconception as to the ends which it is pursuing, hut such, unfortunately, is by no means the ease, and only a few days ago Sir Austen Chamberlain found himself under the necessity ol making a public pronouncement to the effect that neither be nor the Government which he represented wished to Jill the role of a modern Peter the Hermit, and preach a crusade to overthrow Bolshevism. At the same time, recent events have done a great deal to modify the attitude which Great Britain for many years adopted towards European affairs, and this change has not always been appreciated as fully as it deserves either at home or abroad.

THE OLD POLICY AND THE NEW. 'flic present generation has witnessed the divorce of foreign relations from party politics, and for this the chief tribute is due to King Edward VII. During the later years of last century every change of Alinistrv at Westminster meant a complete revolution in tho attitude adopted by Great Britain towards the other Powers. with the result that she became an object of suspicion to the majority of them, and, in spite of Lord /Salisbury’s famous ‘‘mot. ’ the outbreak of the South African War found the Empire in an isolation which was the very reverse of splendid. Indeed, it. is not too inneli to say that hut tor the mistrust which the ambitious til Germany had already aroused in th< minds of her neighbours, the British entanglement in the South Africa would almost certainly have resulted in the formation of a Continental league similar to that which forced the j disastrous Treaty of Versailles upon George 111 and his Ministers in 1783. The conclusion of the Franco-British Entente with the support of all sections of public opinion definitely put an end to this dangerous condition of affairs by lifting foreign policy out of the rut of party politics. Since that time the British relations with the rest of the world have at least been consistent, and even the effects ol the war have done nothing to bring about a return, to the Old \ ictorian traditions. The foreign policy of Air Baldwin ami that of Mr Ramsay ALicDonald are indistinguishable, for the Locarno Pact is but the Geneva Prot-

ocol writ large, and if Labour shows itself critical regarding the Government’s action in China it is largely because it is the duty of an Opposition to oppose; had it been in office it would probably have adopted the same line tile Conservative administration,lias clone. Then, again, the last twenty years, and particularly the period which has elapsed since the end ol the war, have witnessed t.iio growing influence ol the Dominions in the counsels ol the J’oicign Office. In theory, King George can still declare war and make peace on. tihe advice of his British .Ministers, without any rclercnee to the rest of the Empire at all : hut in practice it has recently been conceded that the Dominions are not hound to participate in any conflict without their consent; in fact, the constitution of the Irish Free State contains a clause rendering it imperative to obtain Hie approval of the country before offensive operations can lie commenced. These developments deserve a con-

siderntinn which they have not as yet received, for as it is impossible to conceive a state of affairs in which Groat Britain and Canada were engaged in a war in which Ireland and Australia were neutral, so in the lut are British Foreign Secretaries will have to pursue a policy which is not oulv acceptable to the constituents ol the Parliament sitting at AVestminster, but to the Dominions, individually and collectively as well. In other words as the years pass, British foreign policy is tending to become increasingly more Imperial—which is by no means the same as Imperialistic and less influenced \iy purely European considerations. A REPLY TO CRITICISM. Ever since the days of Lord Salisbury the attitude of the Foreign

; Ever since the days of Lord Salisi bury the attitude of the Foreign Office, in spite of tV 1 assertion ol some ■ foreign critics to the contrary, has been eminently cautious and pacific, and Lord Salisbury himself, although 1 trained in the school of Disraeli, was : the very embodiment of those cliar- [ actcristics which made his great ancestor, Lord Burleigh, so justly famous. This tradition is likely in the future to obtain a stronger hold than ever, in view of the necessity ol following a policy which shall at the same time obtain the unanimous approval of the Dominions and not provoke any party feeling at home. Indeed, in weak hands there is considerable danger that this tear of rousing opposition might result in such a policy of doing nothing at all. In present circumstances, at any rate, it moans that Great Britain is in favour of maintaining the status quo as far as possible, though, while securing the observance of the Treaty of Versailles, she is taking an active part in restoring Germany to her proper place in the counsels of the world. This latter attitude has embittered a certain section of French opinion, which never loses an opportunity of declaiming against British selfishness 1 and what is termed the domination of the Anglo-Saxon bankers. This agitation. which shows signs of increasing rather than of diminishing in intensity. entirely overlooks Wkroe quite incontrovertible facts, viz., that the last war was not fought to make i Franco mistress of Europe, that a balance of power is essential to political stability, and, most important ol all, that the foreign policy of Downing Street is dictated by British and not by French needs. There can be no hope for the restoration of a Europe in which the nations are not upon equal terms, and the Anglopbobes of Paris would do well to realise that Great Britain is to-day pursuing the same policy towards defeated Germany that she followed towards defeated France after the Treaties of Utrecht and of Vienna respectively. In world, as opposed to purely Euro, penn, politics the chief event of the past decade has been the growth of Anglo-Aerican friendship; and here, again, those who are unfriendly to London or to Washington have imagined some deep intrigue on the part of the two great creditor Powers. There can be no doubt that the Government both in Great Britain and in the United States would like to see on the part of their debtors a disposition to settle up as well as to settle down, but it, is surely a very natural wish, and hardly a sufficiently broad foundation upon which to base a conspiracy against the liberties of Europe. The truth, of course,, is that Great Britain and the United States are the only two really important world Powers and the more conscious they became of that faith the more, fortunately, they tend to draw together. > In these circumstances it can surely he claimed, without suspicion of

liinhio national bias, that British lortifr.n policy is dictated by Lritish needs, and that to understand the one it is necessary t;» realise the other. Once this somewhat elementary iact has been grasped, all rumours 01-'sin-ister designs, now against J'ussia, non against Frncne, must vanish; lor the truth is that the British Empire Ins no other wish at tile present time than to live in amity with its neighbours, which it would certainly have little hope of doing if its Government were involved in all the subterranean intrigues which are attributed to it.