The Daily News. SATURDAY, JUNE 25, 1921. EMPIRE PROBLEMS.

Taranaki Daily News, 25 June 1921, Page 4

The Daily News. SATURDAY, JUNE 25, 1921. EMPIRE PROBLEMS.

It is not easy for the people of a new country like New Zealand to divest themselves of the narrow local views inherent to a community that has grown from zero to the full status of nationhood and partnership in the Empire, with all the responsibilities attaching thereto. There is but one way in which this can be done, and that is by thinking and acting from an Empire viewpoint, and not concentrating on what may be thought advantageous to the Dominion, regardless of how the other units may be affected. The war has imposed on all the partners of the Empire the imperative need for the exercise of wise constructive statesmanship, hence the absorbing interest which is centred on the Premiers’ Conference. Judging from the speeches made at the opening meeting, the main problem for consideration is naval defence. Incidentally matters concerning disarmament, and racial equality, are interwoven with the one great central problem, and will need serious consideration. It would seem that, as a starting point, the Premiers are inclined to create a common basis by insisting that a fundamental principle of the future of the Empire shall be a perfect understanding and relationship with America. General Smuts focussed this view when he said that: “The only pathway to safety for the Empire lays alongside America.” It is contended, ■with much truth, that the war and the Panama Canal have made the Pacific the international danger one of the future, hence the need for devoting to the Pacific problem the concentrated wisdom of the Conference; Around this question revolve practically all the important issues which the delegates have to consider. That differences of opinion will arise on some points is only to be expected, but. as General Smuts aptly remarked: “If wisely advised, this Conference may become one of the greatest land-marks in history.” Let us hope it will be a land-mark on which the whole world may look with thankfulness as a memorial for all time of the inauguration of a new era of peace. There are encouraging signs of the development among Empire statesmen of a greater breadth of vision and a more sympathetic grasp of the great principle of unity—not as a theory, but as the only means whereby the Empire can hold together, maintain its prestige, and be a tower of strength to the League of Nations. The world’s peace depends on the influence and example of the great Englishspeaking democracies, and that is why so much stress is laid upon Anglo-American eo-operation in all that concerns international affairs. To enable this to be assured, all that is necessary is to recognise the existence of varying viewpoints and interests, to allow for constitutional differences, and to find a eominon basis of eo-oper-ation for safeguarding not only their respective interests, but those of other nations which are dependent on Britain and America for protection. With regard to disarmament, the American Senate has already moved in the direction of inviting consultation between the United States, the British Empire and Japan. The Premiers’ Conference should have no hesitation in forwarding that humane movement. The renewal of the Anglo-Japanese Treaty is a more complicated question, but it really contains no point that cannot be satisfactorily adjusted. A clause in the present Treaty absolves Britain from action against America, and that of itself, When thoroughly understood by the people of the United States, should enable them to comprehend that the alliance was really a safeguard instead of a menace to their country. The phase of this matter that may have an effect on the Dominions is that, as an ally, Japan will naturally expect friendly treatment of her people as regards immigration. This at once raises the racial e.quality issue, and on this matter the British Premier expressed his views very decidedly. “No greater calamity,” he said, when opening the Conference, “could overtake the world than further accentuation of the world’s divisions upon the line of race. The Empire has done signal service to humanity by bridging those divisions in ths pagt. jt, V-Th.dgpjirt

from that policy, and to fail in that duty, would not only greatly increase the dangers of international war, but it would divide the British Empire against itself.” On the other hand, America and the Dominions are strong in their opposition to Asiatic, peaceful penetration. The problem is all the more difficult to solve by reason of India’s claims having to be considered, and it will tax the wisdom of the Premiers severely to find a way out. Unquestionably, an effective co-operative working arrangement between Britain, Japan and America would be a determining factor in the world’s peace, but whether it can materialise is another matter. The prospect does not appear to be any too encouraging, though a conference might result in a common understanding NAVAL DEFENCE. The question of naval defence and policy is so interwoven with other matters of the first importance coming before the Premiers’ Conference, that it may involve a protracted discussion, unless it is postponed, as suggested by Canada’s representative. In view of the great interest attaching to safeguarding the Pacific, the southern Dominions are particularly concerned in this matter. The main responsibility for the Empire’s defence rests, and must continue to do so, with the Imperial Government, but it is recognised that the Dominions must take a larger share in that responsibility than they have taken in the past, and they naturally desire a corresponding voice in the policy. In touching upon this question at the opening of the Conference, Mr. Hughes (Federal Premier) asserted that ‘’Australia must have naval defence adequate to her safety,” and he favored Dominions’ navies rather than monetary contributions. Mr. Massey was equally insistent on • the necessity for the protection of Australasia, and supported the Japanese alliance. The prevailing opinion appears to be in favor of Britain maintaining her naval superiority on a one-Power standard, end this view is not likely to change. It is worthy of note that the Returned Soldiers’ Association has given prominence to its views on this subject in connection with the disposal of the surplus canteen funds. The report of the special committee on this matter was presented in the shape of a resolution which (inter alia) recommends the Canteen Funds Disposal Board to apply the interest from the fund “to such objects as may best secure such public recognition of the requirements of naval defence, but such money not to be applied in substitution of any Government liability,” Presumably this means spending the money on propaganda and not by way of national subsidy. The evident intention is to arouse the country to a due sense of the need for adequate naval defence, and as the R..S.A. represent an appreciable proportion of those two million overseas men, without whom, according to Mr. Lloyd George, “Proseianism would probably have triumphed,” their views should carry much weight. The Dominion is prepared to take its fair share of the burden of naval defence, but not in the same way as Australia, for whom a navy might bo possible, while the idea of a New Zealand navy would be too absurd for words. The present is not the time for increasing the financial burdens of the people, so that, while the general principles may be settled, it would be advisable to postpone for a while the operation of any new scheme.