The Daily News TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 1922. THE VALUE OF UNITY.

Taranaki Daily News, 28 November 1922, Page 4

The Daily News TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 1922. THE VALUE OF UNITY.

Then speaking in the House of Lords last week during the Ad-■dress-in-Reply debate, Viscount Grey said the situation in the Near Fast was menacing, and the only chance of getting through was by the Allies presenting a united front. With that view there should lie a consensus of opinion, because the value of unity has been proved again and again, but never more emphatically* than in the Great War. It is worthy of note that the correspondent of the Petit Journal states that unity of front now seems assured between the Allies and the Little Entente, Bulgaria and Greece, to the extent that the Greek demands .will not exceed those allowed by the Mudania agreement, while, more significant still, (s the correspondent’s assertion that the Turks are greatly concerned over this unity, as they based all their hopes of a complete divergence of interests and views dividing the European Powers, and giving Ismet an opportunity to manoeuvre and counter-manoeuvre. It will be remembered that at one time, when affairs in the Near East had reached a critical stage, there was just the possibility of the British Empire having to stand alone against the Kemalists, and probably their Russian Allies, and it was at that period the Turks entered upon a policy of making impossible demands which threatened to prove a bar to an amicable an-angement of the many important matters in dispute. The opening of the Lausanne Conference has brought about a great change in the demeanour of the Angora authorities, despite the frothy and bombastic pronouncements of the Russians. It seems now that not only are the Allies practically agreed upon the main points on which a settlement with Turkey is to he based, but the Little Entente, coupled with the reconstruction of the Balkan bloc, united with Poland and Czechoslovakia, and supported by Jugoslavia, have placed an entirely new construction on peace proposals. That this formidable array of nations against Kemalist high-handed claims has already made a deep impression on the Angora authorities is quite clear, and it accounts for the recent cabled message from Lausanne to the effect that a “better impression prevails owing to the Turkish acceptance of the demilitarisation of the frontier zone.” That the Soviet authorities should back up the Kemalists in opposing the freedom of the Dardanelles is a matter of course, and that is precisely why there must be no weakening of the British policy to protect and keep open this important waterway. One Russian delegate, evidently imbued with the idea of forestalling a proposal that the control of the Dardanelles shall be internationalised under the control of the League of Nations, has thought fit to announce that Russia’s fundamental objection to the League being charged with this duty is based on the League being “a mere instrument of the bourgeoise nations.” The objection is characteristic of Soviet ideas, but is not likely to be taken seriously, especially in view of the signal failure of proletariat methods which have brought Russia to the verge of utter ruin. The one gleam of hope for a peaceful settlement in the Near East rests in the display of that unity of which signs are already perceptible. Much depends upon how the chief matters in dispute are handled at the Conference, and especially in the direction of adjusting the views of the smaller Powers. The outlook is certainly more promising. and it is to be hoped will still further improve as the Conference progresses. .