Wairarapa Times-Age MONDAY, JULY 8, 1940. PRODUCTION FOR WAR.

Wairarapa Times-Age, 8 July 1940, Page 4

Wairarapa Times-Age MONDAY, JULY 8, 1940. PRODUCTION FOR WAR.

VOW visiting Australia with a view to seeking the greatest. A possible co-ordination of war preparation and P rod " ctl ° in the Commonwealth and in this country, New Zealand Minister of Supply (Mr Sullivan) has spoken giatefuly ot t e helpful spirit in which he has been met, but appears also to be encountering some difficulties.

T hnnp to eet completed the question of manufactured materials . U ASrSta 8 ‘<the waster l» . «nt o„ F„da > but Ido not appear to be getting them to extent I had hop lam getting material which will have to completed _ in Zealand, which will have to get on its toes. Australia can help she is helping.

Explaining the objects of his mission when he reached Australia a couple of weeks ago, Mr Sullivan eveM } France had made it apparent that new equipment problems had arisen in the United Kingdom calling for more intense efforts by the Dominions. What it was wished to determine was whether the Australian munitions establishments would be, able to »ive New Zealand'any assistance. “In some eases, Mr Sullivan added, “we will require completed ar tides and in others materials only. We feel that it is possib e to develop co-ordination and reciprocity, so that. New Zealand will be a to specialise in certain articles and Australia m others. Ihe Minister’s latest proposal reported today is that a number ot skilled workers should be transferred from New Zealand to Australia. It may be hoped that it is still entirely feasible to pursue the aims of co-ordination and reciprocity, in spite -of immediate disappointment as to the quantities of manufactured materials to be obtained from Australia. In common with other Empire countries, New Zealand most certainly is called upon to do its utmost where the practicable production of war materials is concerned. As the war and its demands have developed, effective measures of war production and supply in this country will be well warranted and even essential, though they may be by normal standards uneconomic. In view of the strain that will be imposed on the total resources of the Empire until the war is won, no other policy deserves to he considered in this country than one that will employ as speedily and as fully as possible all the labour and' all the' machinery and other equipment that is available for the production of war material. We cannot hope in this matter to rival the tremendous development of war industry in Canada, or even the lesser, but still impressive development that is taking shape in Australia. We have a certain amount of equipment,°however—notably that of the railway workshops—which is available or may be adapted t 6 the prodution of munitions, and it is not less important that this branch of enterprise should be developed to its practicable maximum than that we should maintain our direct military effort and expand the production of foodstuffs for export to the Motherland. The most undoubtedly should be made of every opportunity for co-ordination with Australia, and it should be possible to obtain useful items of import from the Commonwealth and perhaps from other sources of supply. We are at the same time under a bounden obligation, however, to develop and expedite the production of war material by every means at our command and it must be hoped that on the return of the Minister of Supply from Australia a new impetus will be imparted to the action already taken or being taken to that end. THE NAZIS AND AMERICA. T INGERING doubts in any American mind that the Nazis contemplate aggression in the Western Hemisphere should be set at rest by the formal rejection by the German Foreign Minister (Herr‘von Ribbentrop) of the Note in which the United States informed the Reich that it would not recognise the transfer of parts of the Western Hemisphere from one nonAmerican Power to another. The German statement of rejection alternates between twisting evasion and blustering defiance and in its final passage challenges the Monroe Doctrine by making its recognition subject to American non-intervention in other parts of the world. Maintaining in the first instance that Germany, “in contrast to England and France,” has no territorial possessions on the American continent and has given no occasion whatever for the assumption that it intends to acquire such possessions, Herr von Ribbentrop proceeds to give precisely the occasion he thus denies by remarking that “the interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine' implicit in the United States communication would amount to conferring upon some European countries the right to possess territories in the Western Hemisphere and not on other European countries.” Such an interpretation, the German statement adds, would be untenable. It is in fact the interpretation the United States, with the concurrence of the rest of the world, has placed upon the Monroe Doctrine ever since that doctrine was promulgated. What is untenable is the contention now advanced by Nazi Germany that the non-intervention in the affairs of the American continent by European nations which is demanded by the Monroe Doctrine can in principle be legally valid only on the condition that American nations, for their part, do not interfere in affairs on the European continent.

The German contention could never have been advanced save by a gangster regime which is doing its utmost to exclude morality from international and all other dealings. As the American Secretary of State (Mr Cordell Hull) lias said, the Monroe Doctrine is solely a policy of self-defence, intended to preserve the independence and integrity of the Americas and standing in absolute contrast to the policies of economic, political and military domination which Nazidom seeks to substitute for the reign of law and liberty. Like the much closer organisation of the British Empire, the Monroe Doctrine and the relationships of which it is the foundation are a contribution to the peace and security of the world at large. The suggestion that nations united under the Monroe Doctrine should thereby be debarred from co-operating with other nations can inspire only derision and contempt. The German pronouncement should serve one good purpose, however, in finally convincing the people of the United States and those of other American countries that American liberty and Nazism cannot continue to exist simultaneously in the world. 11 is true, of course, that this was hardly in any ease in doubt. The intentions and hopes of the Nazis where the Western Hemisphere is concerned have been made manifest in a. Widespread and intensive development of espionage and other hostile activities, not only in Mexico, Uruguay and other Latin republics, and in Canada, but in the United States itself.