Wairarapa Times-Age TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7. 1939. HERTZOG MOVES BACKWARD.

Wairarapa Times-Age, 7 November 1939, Page 4

Wairarapa Times-Age TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7. 1939. HERTZOG MOVES BACKWARD.

JJAV.ING taken in his time some promising steps forward in the direction of racial reconciliation in South Africa, General Uertzog has now retrogressed most regrettably. In his opposition to South African co-operation with the Empire in the war the man who until recently was Prime Minister of the Union, with Boer and British support, has committed himself to an unenlightened programme of separation and isolation which could not be developed without leading, amongst other things, to serious strife within the Union territory.

In announcing his leadership of “ reconsolidated Alrikanderdom,” General Uertzog is reported to have declared I hat General Smuts’s participation in the war greatly contributed to the annihilation of all bonds with Britain. Not only is that contention unconvincing, but it is obvious that the policy General Uertzog now advocates pays poor regard to the interests of any section of the people of the Union. The essentia) lads of the position were tersely summed up by General Smuts in a statement published on Saturday:—

The declared policy of Nazi Germany (he said) is not only to dominate the Continent of Europe, but also to recover the former German possessions in Africa and expand them and so become the most powerful State on earth. We should be foolish to stand back with folded hands awaiting the hour when Germany attacks South-West Africa. Then it would be too late. lam certain that if we all do our duty as men and brothers, then the future is propitious for racial peace and much better unity than we have ever known before.

Fortunately there does not seem to be any doubt that General Smuts will continue to hold the support of an adequate majority of the people of South Africa of both British and Dutch descent. A Dutch Boer, who opposed Britain, as did General Uertzog, in the war of 1899, General Smuts believes that, after the war Britain did her best to give the Boers a. square deal. To the narrow racialism of General Uertzog ami Dr Malan In* opposes an enlightened advocacy of the development ol a. united South African nation in which racial differences will be obliterated. As a commander in the field, and even more as statesman and diplomat, General Smuts has given able and distinguished service not onlv to South Africa but to the Empire.

While there is every likelihood that his policy will prevail, it would be over-optimistic to assume that General Smuts is faced by an easy or simple task in maintaining the essential unity of South Africa and its partnership status in the Empire. There is no question of the people of South Africa giving unanimous support to that policy. The strength of the position is that General Hertzog’s attempt to establish South African neutrality was defeated by a majority vote of the United Party, which, as its name implies, is a party composed ol members of both races, anxious to sink racial differences. The recent state of parties in the Union Parliament was:—

United Party 109 Nationalists 27 Dominion Party .... 10 Labour Party 4

The Nationalists, drawing their support, mainly from the Dutch rural population in the Cape Province and the Orange Free State resent and condemn the “British yoke.” The Dominion Party, whose members come chiefly from Natal, is strongly pro-British. The position , will now be varied in the extent to which the Uniled Party is weakened by the secession led by General Uertzog. The indications are, as has been stated, that General Smuts is assured of adequate support, and that support necessarily is drawn from members of both races. The dissentient Dutch minority is sufficiently numerous, however, to create a state of affairs which will call for careful handling.