THE NAZIS AND RUSSIA

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22985, 14 September 1936, Page 8

THE NAZIS AND RUSSIA

The Nazi leaders’ notion of the way in which the world should be Impressed seems to consist in shouting to the housetops on every possible occasion concerning the importance and power of Germany and her determination not to be put upon by anybody. That, it is to be admitted, is in the dictatorial tradition. The Nuremburg Conference has provided another great opportunity of acquainting Europe with the Nazi temper. The honours in declaration seem to have been easily carried off by Dr Paul Joseph Goebbels, the Minister of Propaganda. Presumably he received carte blanche to speak without reservation and to create a sensation. Even the voice of Peter the Hermit, summoning Christendom in the middle ages to rescue the holy plates from the impious Saracen, could scarcely have been more raucous than that in which Dr Goebbels has called on Europe to engage under German leadership in a crusade against Bolshevism. The excitability which seems so characteristic of Nazism argues a nerviness that may not seem altogether admirable in the pure and heroic Nordic race. But the outburst by Dr Goebbels against Bolshevism is something beyond a mere familiar symptom and has its serious aspects. It is probably true enough to say of it that, uttered in 1914, it would certainly have led to war. Certainly Herr Hitler’s aim of “ war against Bolshevism ” has been no secret and has not awaited a new interpretation. But Dr Goebbels seems to have carried the matter to an astonishingly explicit point, not only denouncing Bolshevism, but singling out high officials of the Soviet Government for attack, and expressing himself in abusive and truculent terms. The strain put upon the diplomatic relations between the two countries must in such circumstances be considerable. For so provocative an utterance as this fulmination against Russia by a responsible Minister of one country concerning the rulers of another in time of peace it would probably be difficult to find a parallel. Hard words may break no bones, and may on occasion be a safety valve. Dr Goebbels could not expect to have a monopoly of them in this instance. The Moscow journal, the Pravda, has returned him something more than a Roland for his Oliver in one direction, and has retorted with a pen-picture of the Nazi Minister, “ chief theoretician of German Fascism,” which leaves nothing to the imagination in its intimate and unflattering detail in respect of his persona] and physical attributes. The language of diplomacy is usually associated with restraint. But these exchanges between Germany and Russia are certainly not of a kind that is calculated to maintain a peaceful relationship between the two countries. The whole tenor of the speeches at the Nuremburg Conference has been such as to direct increased attention, in an apprehensive sense, to the intentions and policy of Germany. If the aim of Nazi diplomacy at the present juncture can be summed up as being “ to provide for the extension of Germany’s power in all directions without allowing Europe to crystallise into a front of common resistance,” possibly the idea that the nations of Europe may fall in under Germany’s lead to combat and destroy Bolshevism is a more subtle conception than might appear on the surface.