Wairarapa Times-Age SATURDAY, AUGUST 26, 1939. THE DIPLOMACY OF DUPLICITY.

Wairarapa Times-Age, 26 August 1939, Page 6

Wairarapa Times-Age SATURDAY, AUGUST 26, 1939. THE DIPLOMACY OF DUPLICITY.

WHILE it holds interesting and rather sinister possibilities in its details, the Russo-Soviet Fad of Xon-aggression claims attention primarily on account of the discreditable circumstances of duplicity in which it lias taken shape. 'I he essential facts do not seem to.be at all in dispute. As ?dr. Chamberlain reminded the House of Commons on Thursday, French and British military missions went Io Moscow very shortly after the Russian Commissary for Foreign Affairs. M. Molotov, had said that "if we could come to a. successful conclusion of our military discussions a political agreement should not present any insurmountable difficulty. ” The missions had been in Moscow for a little over a fortnight and discussions were proceeding apparently in an atmosphere ol mutual trust when the bombshell, as Mr. Chamberlain has called it, ol the Soviet-Berman pad was thrown down. On these fads no other opinion seems possible than that the Soviet Government was only pretending to negotiate* with Britain and France while it - was act ually rounding oil its negotiations with Germany. People descending to such standards class themselves so definitely that there is no need to 'waste any further words on them. While the duplicity of the Soviet Government is extraordinary, there is cause for wonder also in the conclusion of a friendly agreement between those who have classed themselves as the ultimate irreconcilables of humanity. Unstable as he has been in all other details of principle ami policy, Herr Hiller has never deviated hitherto from his frantic denunciations of Communists and -Jews. Il only remains for him now to abate his anti-Semitism and Ik* will have boxed the compass in every respect. In quite recent public utterances the Fuehrer has been as vehement as ever in his declarations of undying hostility Io Bolshevism and his party presumably is organised still for a. war of extirpation against the Communists whom it has hounded down and persecuted pitilessly in Germany and other territories under its control. In the words of the chief Nazi propagandist, Dr. Goebbells, Bolshevism is the problem of Europe’s very survival. Here is the parting of the ways, here one must take sides for or against, accepting all the consequences involved in such a decision. .Vow these parted ways have joined. According to the German Foreign Minister, Iferr von Ribbentrop—the author of the AntiComintern Pact—Herr Hitler and AL Stalin have decided to be friends “and the pact xvill prove a firm foundation on which Russia and Germany will build in close co-operation.” So ends the Anti-Comintern Pact, to which Germany, Italy, Japan, Spain and some smaller States were parties. It is or was an agreement under which the contracting parties “mutually agree to inform each other regarding the activity of the Communist International, to discuss the necessary defensive measures and Io enforce them in close co-operation.” Paying any regard to the foundations of bad faith and abandonment of principle on which the Soviet-German Pact is erected, it would evidently be foolish to regard the agreement as open to any straightforward interpretation. An extended allowance must be made for what is in the minds of the autocracies which have concluded this agreement, but has not been expressed in its articles. Even at a surface view, however, the pact implies that Russia has in great part conceded Germany a. free hand in Europe, possibly in* return for a free hand for herself in Asia. Article 2, which slates that “if one of the contracting Powers becomes the object of warlike action on the part of a third Power, then the other contracting Power will in no wise support the third Power” possibly means that if Poland, for example, elects to fight in defence of her liberty, Russia will help to throw her to the German wolf. Interesting questions suggest themselves with reference to Rumania and other small European States, Hie subjugation of which has been regarded and proclaimed hitherto by the Nazis, not least by Herr Hitler himself, as a stage or stages towards the satisfaction of German ambitions in the Soviet Ukraine. As to these important details and others, enlightenment can only be awaited. ■ The overshadowing and commanding fact clearly brought out is that Russia is no longer to be regarded as a possible member of a European peace front—an association of nations united with the object of resisting aggression and upholding a reign of law in the affairs of nations. Article 4of the pact states that “neither of the two contracting Powers will join any other group of Powers which directly or indirectly is directed against one of the two.” This seems to imply not only that Russia sets herself apart from the peace front, but that the signatories to the pact are declaring themselves opposed to the League of Nations, or any alternative association of nations to uphold peace and justice. There are details of the pact which seem inconsistent one with another. For instance, the undertaking in Article 1 Io refrain from acts of force and aggression can hardly be reconciled with details that follow. Just what that undertaking is worth no doubt will appear speedily.