Wairarapa Times-Age SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 1941. A MEMORABLE SPEECH.

Wairarapa Times-Age, 8 November 1941, Page 4

Wairarapa Times-Age SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 1941. A MEMORABLE SPEECH.

TT has been said with truth and justice, by a London comment--1 ator that the fact that a speech has been made by the leader of an allied nation in no way alters or lightens the demands which are made upon the people of the British Empire in order that the war against Nazism may be prosecuted to victory. At the same time the speech by M. Stalin, of which salient passages were reported yesterday, is likely to make a great impression throughout the. English-speaking world and to awaken respect in the minds of many who are by no means prepared to look with favour on the methods by which M. Stalin has established and consolidated his power in Russia.

In its resolute, and realistic presentation of the cardinal facts of the war, the speech was worthy of the leader of a great nation struggling heroically, and in temporary but bitter and acute adversity, against odds that are for the time being almost overwhelming* Few nations in the whole course of known human history have ever been called upon to tight as hard for their existence as Russia is fighting today. Yet in the speech of the Soviet leader there is no trace of repining. On the contrary his words breathe a calm spirit of confident determination ami of faith that the better cause ultimately will prevail. The speech is a. great rallying call, not only to the Russian people, but to all'the nations, free or meantime enslaved, which are fighting the powers of darkness.

The public utterances of those who have been called to leadership have in these grim and terrible days no unimportant hearing on the efforts of the warring nations. Even the. screeching diatribes of Hitler and his accomplices serve a purpose of its” evil kind. A nobler and greater purpose is served by the utterances of the leaders of the democracies—men dedicated to true ideals of human progress, amongst whom Mr. Churchill and President Roosevelt stand pre-eminent today.

Russia is not. a democracy, as that term is understood in the countries of the British Empire and the United States. Yet time and events may show that M. Stalin’s speech on Thursday was not less noteworthy in opening the way to continuing understanding between the Soviet Union and the English-speak-ing democracies than in its calmly implacable defiance of Nazism and assurance of ultimate victory.

lii the magnificent stand of the Russian nation and armed forces against Nazi invasion, reason had already appeared for modifying the impression widely held not very long ago that between one dictatorship and another there was no very great difference. M. Stalin has made it clearer than ever that there is in fact an enormous difference between the Soviet dictatorship and that of the Nazis. He did this not only in his pungent denunciation of the Nazi regime and his declaration that: “The Nazis are not human beings; they are beasts,” but in a statement that will be welcomed by al! lovers of human freedom and of fair dealing and justice between nations.

It is not our aim (he said) to occupy any alien country. Our purpose is to liberate our own country and come to the assistance of. the oppressed Slavonic nations. After freeing them from Hitler we will leave them to create their own forms of life, without meddling in their affairs.

If she adheres, in letter and spirit to that declaration, Russia will be able to play a great part, in company with the European and American democracies, in shaping a better* world in days to come.

The attacks that Russia made on Finland, and, in company with Germany, on Poland, may be instanced as actions flatly inconsistent with the declaration now made by M. Stalin. At least, however, Russia is in a position to contend that in taking action alike against Finland and Poland, she was impelled by an overwhelming strategic necessity and that her only alternative would have been to leave herself even more dangerously exposed to attack than the event in any case proved her to be. With more positive effect, the Soviet Union is in a position to point out that in the two decades following the war of 1914-18 it not only ‘abstained from aggression against small or great neighbours, but made persistent and long-continued efforts, largely through the agency of M. Maxim Litvinov, who is now once more in important office as designated Ambassador to the United States, to bring about the establishment in Europe of a system of collective security, based on disarmament and international collaboration.