UNYIELDING STAND

Wairarapa Times-Age, 6 May 1939, Page 7

UNYIELDING STAND

EMPHASIS ON DECISIVE FACTS. REASONABLE SOLUTION SOUGHT. By Telegraph—Press Association -Copyright. (Received This Day: 9.40 a.m.) WARSAW. May 5. Referring to the Anglo-Polish Agreement, Colonel Beck said: "Even for a man of the most simple reasoning, it is clear that what was decisive was neither the character, purpose nor scope of the Anglo-Polish Agreement, but the mere fact that the agreement was concluded. This is important for an appreciation of the intentions of Germany’s policy. In order to reach a proper estimate of the situation, we should first ask what is the real aim of it all?”

Turning to Danzig, he declared that the Free City was not invented by the Versailles Treaty, but had existed for centuries. Because of the positive cleavage between Polish and German interests, German merchants assured the city's prosperity and development, thanks to Polish overseas trade. The city’s very raison d’etre was due to the decisive fact of its situation at the mouth of Poland’s only great river. No.w it lay on the main railway connecting Poland with the Baltic. “It is truth no new formulas can change that the population of Danzig today is predominantly German,” Colonel Beck observed, “but its livelihood' and prosperity depend on Poland’s economic potential. We stand firmly by the rights and interests of our overseas trade and maritime policy in Danzig. “In seeking reasonable and conciliatory solutions we have purposely not endeavoured to exert any influence on the free national, ideological and cultural developments of Danzig's German majority,” Colonel Beck continued, “but when, after repeated statements from German statesmen that the city would not be the object of Polish-German conflict, I hear a demand for the annexation of Danzig by the Reich, when I do not get a reply to our proposals of March 26 for a common guarantee of the existence and rights of the Free City, and when I learn that this is regarded as a refusal to negotiate, I have to ask myself what is the real'aim of it all? Is it the freedom of the German population, which is not menaced, or a question of prestige? Is it a question of barring Poland from the Baltic, from which Poland will not let herself be barred? The same consideration concerns communication across our province of Pomerania. I insist on the term “Province of Pomerania.” The word corridor is an artificial invention, because it is ancient Polish land, with an insignificant percentage of German colonists.”

FACILITIES AND SOVEREIGNTY. Colonel Beck added: “We have given the Reich full railway facilities. We have allowed Germans to travel without Customs or passport formalities from the Reich to East Prussia. We have suggested an extension of these facilities to road transport. Again the question arises: What is the aim of it all? We have no reason to obstruct Germans in communications with their eastern province, but on the contrary we have no ground whatever for restricting our sovereignty over our own territory. Germany seems to be demanding one-sided concessions over Danzig and communication across Pomerania. A self-respecting nation does not make one-sided concessions. Where is the reciprocity? It looks rather vague in the German proposals. ALLUSIONS TO SLOVAKIA. Herr Hitler mentioned a triple condominium for Slovakia. I heard that suggestion for the first time in Herr Hitler's speech. Allusions merely were made in the course of earlier conversations that, in the event of a general agreement, the problem of Slovakia could be discussed. We have not sought to pursue such conversations because it is not our custom to make bargains with the interests of others. Moreover, the extension of the Non-Aggression Pact to twentyfive years did not propose any definite form, in the course of recent conversations, although unofficial allusions were made by the Germans. Herr Hitler proposed as a concession on his part the recognition and definite acceptance of the existing Polish-Ger-man frontier. This would be recognition of what is our property indisputably, de jure and de facto, and for this reason this proposal cannot alter my point that the German claims regarding Danzig’s communications remain one-sided. The last passage of the German memorandum reads: If the Polish Government attaches importance to a new contractual settlement of PolishGerman relations, lhen the German Government is prepared for it.’ “The motive for such an agreement would be the word peace, which Herr Hitler emphasised in the course of his speech. Peace is certainly Poland’s aim, but conditions are necessary for this word to have real value —first, peaceful intentions; secondly, peaceful methods of action. If Germany were guided by these two conditions —provided the principles I have previously enumerated are respected—all conversations would be possible. If the conversations materialise, Poland will regard the problem objectively in view of the experience of recent times, but will not refuse her goodwill. Poles do not know the conception of peace at any price. The only thing in life for men, nations and States which is without price is honour.”