HITLER’S PEACE

Wairarapa Times-Age, 10 November 1939, Page 7

HITLER’S PEACE

HYMN TO MILITARY GLORY TRIUMPH OVER DEFEATED POLES. COMMENT BY BRITISH PRESS. Following Herr Hitlers "peace" speech of October 6. the British Press analysed its contents and criticised its purpose. The "London Times" opened its comments by saying that "Hitler disappointed no expectations yesterday. The oration delivered before the sounding board of a dummy Reichstag was. as always, of immense length and exuberance. It consisted in part of a hymn of German military glory and a paean of triumph over the defeated Poles."

One of the most striking portions of the "Times" leading article was an appeal to history, in these words: — "It is one of his less savoury habits to cover with insults the victim whom he has trapped and strangled. When he had tricked and enslaved the Czechs his first care was to try to befoul them with abuse. Yesterday it was the turn of the Poles, his latest victim —and his last. Year by year Hitler has larded Poland with assurances —'Poland will continue to exist (T 933 .... Germans and Poles must reconcile themselves to the fact of each other’s existence (1934) . . . . Danzig and Germany respect Polish rights (1938) .... A people of 33,000,000 will always strive for an outlet to the sea (1938) . . . .' and so on. Just five months ago he assured Mt Roosevelt that 'all States bordering on Germany have received much mori binding assurances’ than any demanded. of him. And yesterday? Poland is ; State which should never have existed. Her existence was always bound t< lead to war. Nor is that all. True to his most contemptible trait he seeks to discredit Polish valour, naively explaining that he does not want any legend of Polish heroism to entwine itseli with the memory of the defence o! Warsaw. Modlin and Hela. Unconsciously he belittles the German achievement by pouring contempt upon the organisation and leadership of the Polish State. But the chief offence of its leaders seems to have been that they refused to grant passive submission to 'revision,' that is, to dictation, and this contention culminates in the charge that Poland was about to overrun East Prussia to conquer Germany up to the Elbe, and to ‘annihilate the Reich.' Will even a German believe that? This is offered as the reason why Poland 'refused to discuss’ the notorious offers of 'appeasement.' one of which mysteriously escaped presentation in the spring and the other of which was drafted but deliberately withheld, on the eve of an elaborately planned and predetermined war."

The "Daily Herald" of October 7, also dealt with the “peace" offer in' its editorial column. “The Hitler ‘peace' offer has been made," said the “Daily Herald." "Of what does it consist? "It comes not in the form of a clear and detailed proposal to the Governments of Europe and the world, but at the end of a speech glorifying the destruction of Poland. “Herr Hitler is full of friendly words. “He seeks to quieten the fears of neutral countries by fair promises to them. They well know how to value those promises. He makes—as he has made before —a specific attempt to convince France of his friendliness, and thus drive a wedge between France and Britain. He will not succeed.

"There is a proposal, but of a vague kind, for a conference to discuss colonies and raw materials, currency problems, international trade, limitation of armaments, the prohibition of poison gas and submarines and bombing planes .... “ . . . . But Herr Hitler could have had such a conference before war started. That was made clear to him by Britain. "He preferred war. He preferred to follow the path of aggression and the tearing up of treaties which he has followed throughout his career. “Now 1 he talks of peace. But as he talks of peace he boasts of his Polish massacre and declares that the future of that betrayed and broken country and of Eastern Europe is one to be settled by Germany and Russia alone. To that there can be only one reply. The people of Britain and France, like the people of all civilised nations, desire peace—but it must be an honourable. a just and a lasting peace. "If Hitler wants such a peace, let him give an earnest of it in action —not merely in words which are with him of a currency too brittle for confidence. “Let him withdraw his troops from Poland. Let him agree that at the conference he proposes, the restoration of Poland and of Czecho-slovakia shall come first upon the agenda.

"On such a basis there might be a possibility of a genuine conference in w'hich not only Britain and Franco but the great neutral Powers could be invited to participate. “But there can be no peace which is merely called to confirm the fruits of aggression ....’’

The editorial reaction of the "Mai: Chester Guardian" was expressed in part in these terms: — "The world has not been deceived by Hitler’s speech. Whether we turn if the United States or to the neutral peoples of Europe, many of them speaking in circumstances that make speech dangerous, we find widespread mistrust, based on an unprecedented career of bad faith. Hitler’s broken promises choke him. For he makes a proposal which stumbles at once or this question of confidence. He wants . conference and. before entering it. he tells us that Poland is settled and tha' he must have his colonies back. Bn’ this conference cannot be held ’amid the roar of guns or under the pressure of mobilised armies.’ The man wh > makes this suggestion possesses the greatest military machine in the world He can summon it at a moment's notice. He has no need to ask anybody oto consult anybody. His successes ir Europe have been due to his power of acting when he pleases, and how h<pleases. He invades without declaring

war; he moves his Army from frontier to frontier without having to give explanations: no pact or solemn pledge restrains him. What, then, would our position be if the Allies demobilised their forces in front of a man who has only to lift his hand to set the greatest Army in the world on the march? What surprises would not the master of all this energy and power spring upon the world when it suited him to strike again? Would the conference ever meet? If it met. in what atmosphere would it confer?

■■ . . . . The demand that he must be allowed to do what he likes with Poland and Czecho-Slovakia must be resisted as firmly as any direct threat to our immediate interests. His description of his treatment of Czechoslovakia is an excellent illustration of what he means when he asks us to leave the East to him. 'Germany has not only restored peace and order in its protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia. but above all prepared the ground for fresh economic prosperity and for an ever-closer understanding between the two nations.' No doubt he plans a similar paradise for other neighbours if his plans are not upset by the Allies."