SOVIET POLICY

Wairarapa Times-Age, 25 March 1939, Page 8

SOVIET POLICY

DRASTIC REVISION LIKELY TURN TOWARDS THE SEA. MOSCOW’S WESTERN INFLUENCE. Drastic revision of Soviet foreign policy—turning its back on Europe, its eyes on Asia—is foreseen by some diplomats as a probable result of the successful Anglo-French pressure on Czechoslovakia to give Adolf Hitler new territory, said an Associated Press message from Moscow to the- New York Times at the end of September.

Official observers believed Moscow's influence on Western European States would have dwindled almost to the vanishing point when Czechoslovakia was “neutralised” by German encroachments. The Soviet Government newspaper Izvestia published a grim warning, saying that “the fate of Czechoslovakia is the fate of France.” Government sources suggested in Soviet press articles that a German victory in Czechoslovakia automatically would mean Rumania and other Danubian States would adjust themselves to German hegemony and abandon all hope of support from France, their former protector. Poland, already aligned with Germany in plans for gaining minorities at Czechoslovakia’s expense, was considered by Moscow as definitely in the German camp. So, many believed, the Soviet Union, diplomatically encircled, might forget Europe and seek to exercise a dominant influence in Asia.

Foreign Commissar Maxim Litvinoff’s Geneva speech, in which he accused France and Britain of capitulating to Hitler, ignoring a Soviet offer of military aid, was seen in Moscow as reiteration of the official Soviet position, that it Would be loyal to its treaty obligations. COMMITMENTS LIMITED. Since the Soviet-Czech mutual assistance pact did not require Moscow to act until France fulfilled a similar pact with Czechoslovakia, Russian commitments where considered limited. Some foreign diplomats were of the opinion that the Soviet Union would confine its aid to measures similar to those given the Spanish Government, even if France fought for Czechoslovakia.

Bitter against France and Britain, a Soviet spokesman expressed contempt for their “full-blooded conspiracy” to help Hitler in hope of saving their own skins.

A growing tendency in Soviet press and official circles was to emphasise belief in the essential sameness of all Imperialist Powers, whether active aggressors or collaborators with aggressors. Some diplomatic observers reached the conclusion that Moscow foresaw that Czechoslovakia would have to capitulate and would use it as ground work for a new, vigorous propaganda campaign against, all Imperialist Governments, including Britain..

Zdehlk Fierlinger, the Czechoslovakian Minister, has received a message from his Government announcing that Czechoslovakia had accepted the Anglo-French terms for the Sudeten settlement under overwhelming pressure, said a special message from Moscow to the same newspaper. No comment on this turn in the situation could be obtained at the Soviet Foreign Office. It is certain, though, that when authoritative comment is given it will strongly condemn France and England for failing Czechoslovakia and once more retreating before an aggressive Germany. In the Soviet view every such retreat only makes it more certain there will be war, and that France and England will be at an ever greater disadvantage in comparison with Germany. Hitler's “self-determination” policy in accordance with which first Germany then Poland and Hungary have proposed to dismember Czechoslovakia in the supposed interest of German Polish and Hungarian minorities residing there, inspired Pravdo, the Communist Party organ, to the suave editorial suggestion that such a policy might prove a boomerang. Pravda especially mentioned Poland where there is considerable agitation over the Polish minority in Czechoslovakia, as a country which might find such a policy awkward.

“If a census were taken of the Poles residing in the Ukrainian and White Russian regions of the Polish State the result could hardly serve as reason for those 'regions belonging to Poland,” said Pravda.

“Furthermore, should one bring up the delicate question of what rights of self-determination, what rights in general are enjoyed by the Ukrainian and White Russian populations of Poland, the result would prove no less eloquent.” As to the international crisis, the same editorial further said:— “The Soviet Union regards with equanimity the question as to which Imperialist beast of prey runs the affairs of this or that colony, this or that dependent colony, for it sees no difference between German and English beasts of prey. “By accepting brigandage in respect to Czechoslovakia, England and France play with fire, for tomorrow these same questions may be raised for them in certain regions of Asia and Africa that are now under the domination of the ‘democratic States.'