The Daily News. THURSDAY, JUNE 9, 1921. INTERNATIONAL ALLIANCES

Taranaki Daily News, 9 June 1921, Page 4

The Daily News. THURSDAY, JUNE 9, 1921. INTERNATIONAL ALLIANCES

No surprise can be felt at the action of the Paris Press in strongly advocating an Anglo-French alliance, but the idea of America joining such an alliance, in order to give it full value, displays a remarkable lack of comprehension of the fundamental principles of American policy in relation to such matters. That France ardently desires to be absolutely rendered safe from future aggressicn is only natural, and it would seem that sooner than trust the League of Nations she would prefer a solid backing of Britain and America. In view of what the French have suffered in the past at the hands of Germany there is some logic in the arguments advanced by the Paris Press. There is also a certain amount of danger, as well as insuperable difficulties. Apart from the serious question of constituting alliances among the nations, the first point to be considered is the volatile temperament of the French people and the tendency of the statesmen to take the bit between their teeth in times of excitement, regardless of friends or foes. This phase was strikingly illustrated recently relative to advancing into the Ruhr district despite the remonstrances of the Allies. The colossal sacrifices made by Britain in defending France —as well as herself—in the late war should have convinced the French people that Britain’s friendship and support in the time of need was a tower of strength. No alliance was needed to cause British intervention; it was merely the dictates of friendship and justice. The Matin makes a special point of the proposed alliance not being limited to friendship. The inference is obvious. In asserting that “Europe can do nothing without an entente between France and Britain,” the Matin takes too much for granted, and, instead of strengthening its argument, weakens it, for if the plan materialised it would bring about a dominating coalition that would enable Franc? to indulge in dangerous crowing and set the League of Nations at defiance. Her public men may have little faith in the League because of its impotence to back up its edicts by armed force, promptly and vigorously, but if peace is to be promoted among the nations the less menace there is in the shape of offensive and defensive alliances, the greater will be the chance of eliminating warfare. America refused to join the League of Nations because membership would involve participation in international complications, and there is no more probability of the United States entering into an alliance with France and Britain than there is of such a co-operation taking place with Germany. The suggestion by the journal Le Petit Parisian that France could support Britain in regard to the Dominions by resuming the conversations begun in 1919 with Australia for the creation, either in the Pacific or elsewhere, of FrancoBritish regional associations resembles closely the appearance of a bribe, and is evidently inspired by recent happenings as regards Japan, wherein America, is also interested. This is confirmed by the further contention that France could support Britain in her Oriental task —a manifest quid pro quo that is intended to show what France eould do as her share of the compact. Neither- British, Dominion, nor American statesmen are likely to be in any way influenced by these thinly veiled inducements, nor will they for a moment seriously entertain the notion of being led into trouble by

France. Their efforts are needed to preserve peace and to recover from the burden of the late war, instead of in preparing for the next military or naval struggle. Any alliance between two or more nations would probably be followed by similar action on the part of other groups, and in that direction is great danger. Disarmament and the cultivation of amity and good faith among the nations are far more politic than making a parade of strength.