COLONIAL POLICY

Wairarapa Times-Age, 24 November 1942, Page 3

COLONIAL POLICY

BRITISH AND AMERICAN OPINION POSSIBLE DIVERGENCE OF VIEWS. DISCUSSION IN LONDON. (Special P.A. Correspondent.) LONDON, November 22. At a time when it is being generally agreed that Anglo-American post-war friendship will be very important for the world’s future, the general public in Britain has suddenly seen a great division between some sections of opinion in the two countries on the subject of imperialism . This subject has received the limelight as a result of the verbal exchanges between Mr Wendell Willkie and Mr Churchill. The British for so long had taken the Empire for granted that it was something of a shock to many to find their viewpoint suddenly assailed, though Mr Winant, the American Ambassador in London, expressed the opinion that between Britain and America there was “a greater divergence of viewpoint on British colonial policy than on any other subject.” Briefly, Mr Willkie apparently believes that colonies should be the wards of the United Nations, their basic commodities should be freely available to the world, and their safety protected by an international police force, and the full yield of their resources should be used for their own health, education and training in practices of selfgovernment. He stated that this could not be accomplished when one of the two principals of the Atlantic Charter seemingly defended the old imperialistic order and declared to a shocked world, “We mean to hold our own.” It is observed that millions of Americans share Mr Willkie’s views. MR CHURCHILL’S STATEMENT. Mr Churchill’s comment has evoked approval and condemnation in Britain. Approval was expressed by Sir Edward Grigg, the War Secretary, who said that Britain must stand by her colonial responsibilities, and disapproval by the Labour newspaper "Daily Herald,” which chides Mr Churchill for not appearing to share the American statesmen’s enthusiasm lor planning during the war the shape of the world at peace. The “Herald” also protested against the phrase ‘we mean to hold our own.” On the other hand, the journel “The Spectator” declares that Mr Willkie misrepresented Mr Churchill as meaning the intention that Britain would hold on indefinitely to ail she has, which could spring only from ignorance and perversity, whereas Britain for a century had been steadily and patiently educating her dependencies for the responsibilities of successful independence. It must be admitted that some people are of the opinion that America is not altogether altruistic, and that she is at present speaking with two voices, firstly of Messrs Roosevelt, Winant and Wallace, and secondly of big business. Thus a writer in the “New Statesman and Nation” says: “This American interest (in the colonial field) is very welcome, but there are clear enough dangers if America is to be the America of Wall Street.” Mi’ Kingsley Martin, the editor of the “New Statesman,” who is at present in America, writes: “After last war American business poured out money on capital investments in Europe and lost it, this time the capitalists, if he is clever, would allow capital development on lease-lend principles and* on the foundation of American money and goodwill, create overseas markets that, as individual capitalists, they cannot fail to desire. This would be sensible on the part of big business. More likely it will regard Mr Wallace (the Vice-President) as an arch-enemy and go straight imperialist.”

MANY BRITONS PUZZLED. Many Britons, as “The Times” points out, are puzzled that the .Americans should proclaim without cavil their intentions to re-establish the integrity of the French colonial empire while apparently regarding the integrity of the British Empire as an inadmissible war aim. They inquire if Spain, Portugal, Belgium and Holland are to retain their colonial territory, and is the British colonial empire the only ohe to go into liquidation. Further British viewpoints arc expected during the debate in the coming week in the House of Commons.

BRITISH MODESTY PRAISED BY MR WILLKIE. NEW YORK, November 22. The British are playing down their part in the North African campaign, in order to give an extra lift to America, asserted Mr Willkie, addressing the British War -Relief Society. He added: “It will be written in history that, it was General Montgomery’s magnificent ability at El Alamein that made possible‘everything that America is now doing in North Africa. .When the war is over the story of Britain s part in North Africa yesterday and . today will be one of the noblest sagas in history.” Mr Willkie said that at a Kremlin banquet he praised Russia’s matchless courage, but also called attention to the same matchless courage of the British during the blitz.