The Daily News. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1920. AMERICA AND MESOPOTAMIA

Taranaki Daily News, 1 December 1920, Page 4

The Daily News. WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 1920. AMERICA AND MESOPOTAMIA

The claim which has been made by the United States Government, to participate in the rights and privileges secured under the mandate provided for in the treaties of peace, is just what, might have been expected when the particular question related to the Mesopotamia]! oilfields. It was bound to be only a question of time when some important 'American interests would be affected by the business of the League of Nations in such a way as to place the United States in an awkward position as the result of not joining the League. America already controls the petrol market, and would doubtless like to be in a position to control all other oil supplies. Th§ Monroe Doctrine lias been made an effective barrier to America's taking part; in any work of-the League that involved the possibility of military action, but it apparently does not prevent the country from trying to obtain equal benefits as regards resources of a profitable nature with those pertaining to members of the League who are pledged to carry out all their responsibilities under the covenant. America, having deliberately abstained from joining the League, has now been compelled, probably by pressure on the part of her oil magnates, to base a claim to take part in the settlement of the terms of the Mesopotamia!! mandate on the ground that she participated in the war and contributed to its successful conclusion. To any other country than America being compelled to resort to such an obvious shuttle would have been humiliating. Not so with the authorities of the great Republic, for they not only claim to have a voice in settling the mandates, but lake the high-handed stand that the draft of the Mesopotamian and

Palestine mandates shall actually be submitted to their consideration. before being submitted to the League, a claim as arrogant as it is preposterous. The opportunity is one that the League might well seize for demonstrating to America that she cannot dictate to that body, and that until she enters the covenant, her views cannot be recognised. There is another aspect of the question which more particularly concerns Britain. Whatever help that America gave in the war—and the Allies give her full credit for that help—she left Britain saddled with the task of conducting a serious campaign in Mesopotamia, in the interest of future peace and civilisation. America finds it convenient to ignore that all the oil in Asia cannot compensate Britain for the sacrifices made, the thousands of lives destroyed, and the hundreds of millions of pounds poured out into that region. Yet America, who stood by aud held aloof from help in that campaign, now claims practically a full share of any benefits to be derived from the petroleum fields of Mesopotamia. It is difficult to adequately express an opinion on this claim without imputing unworthy motives to this great_ nation. At the same time the United States do not hesitate to insinuate that Britain is seek ing, under the San Kemo agreement, the permanent control of Mesopotamian oil. If the League has any respect for its dignity it should tell America plainly that she has no standing in League affairs until entering that body, ana that meanwhile the League will do its best to decide on all matter* coming within its sphere. To admit America's el aim would act as a very dangerous precedent which Germany might press in her case, f the League is to be influenced by outside pressure then it mav | as well be disbanded.