The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 1928 THE RHINELAND PROBLEM.

Hokitika Guardian, 12 September 1928, Page 2

The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 1928 THE RHINELAND PROBLEM.

A few days ago a statement was issued from Berlin by the Socialist Press Bureau to the effect that at the forthcoming Assembly of the League of Nations, Dr Mueller, the German Chancellor, would demand the complete evacuation of the Rhineland. About the same time the German Press circulated reports of an interview between Herr Stresemann, the German Foreign Minister, and M. Poincare, in which it was asserted that the two statesmen had agreed “not to oppose the evacuation of the zone at a date prior to that fixed by the Treaty of Versailles.” Following on those statements, Dr Mueller has had more than one prolonged conversation with the French Foreign Minister, M. Briand, in which it appears, the question of the Rhineland was raised, if not discussed at length. All these indications point to the revival ol the controversy over the occupation,of German territory at the meeting of the League of Nations now in progress at Geneva, where all the Powers concerned will be able to take an active part in the debate. It is quite easy, comments the Auckland Star, to under - stand the desire of the Germans to see the last of the armies of occupation. The maintenance of foreign troops, and more especially of French garrisons, in German territory is a permanent humiliation to the German people and a constant reminder that in the eyes of the rest of the world they are still regarded as responsible for the Great War and for all the misery that it entailed. They argue with considerable force that, as Germany is now a member oi the League of Nations, and has been effectually disarmed, it would l>e in keeping with “the spirit of Locarno and the universal desire for peace and friendship between the nations that the most painful and degrading of all the penalties decreed by the Treaty oi Versailles should now be revoked. And they add, with some reason, that the punctuality of Germany’s payments under the Dawes Plan has deprived France and the other Powers of any further need for a material security to be held againfet the liquidation of Germany’s acknowledged debts. AH this is plausible enough, but it naturally amounts to a statement of the case solely from the German point of view. France’s standpoint must also be taken into account, and in view of all that has passed we can hardly blame the French nation for still feeling .a certain amount of apprehension and anxiety about their future relations with their neighbours across the Rhine. It is true that the Locarno agreement lias done something to recompense France for the guarantee of security promised at Versailles but subsequently withdrawn by the United States 'and Britain But the eastern border of France is still, as it always has been, dangerously exposed to a. sudden attack, and if ever the Germans should be swept off their feet by a wave of militant fervour, there can ho no certainty that with the Rhine frontier in German hands the other Powers could intervene speedily enough to save France from grievous disaster There is still a strong militarist party in Germany, and appeals for retaliation and vengeance on France are neither infrequent nor unpopular. For all these reasons France is strongly disinclined to abate any of the advantages secured for her by the Treaty of Versailles, and though lit. Briand, in his usual conciliatory fashion, has evidently refrained from rebuffing Dr ■Mueller’s advances, the whole question would need to ho discussed by all tbe Powers who signed the treaty before any readjustment in tbe terms of occupation could be arranged.