MATTER OF PRINCIPLE.

Waikato Times, Volume 121, Issue 20266, 7 August 1937, Page 6

MATTER OF PRINCIPLE.

The differences between Italy and Great Britain in the last year or two have been, according to the leading journal in Rome, " only of a psychological nature," but there is at least one issue likely to prove the existence of two very divergent poHcies. There have been reports that the ItaHan authorities want to secure British recognition of the conquest of Abyssinia, as the price to be paid for a renewed undei standing in the Mediterranean, and that may net be readily granted. During the Imperial Conference it was stared, though not officially, that the views of the overseas Dominions differed from those of the British Foreign Office regarding this matter. Mr Eden, it was said, favoured the granting of recognition of Italy’s position in Abyssinia but the overseas delegates strongly opposed the proposal, and apparently favoured the retention of the League policy of non-recognition of any territorial changes made by force. If these reports prove to be correct then it will be difficult for the British Foreign Secretary to grant recognition knowing that his policy would be opposed, both in communications with the Dominions and in the Assembly of the League of which they are all members. The issue, however, is not solely one for British decision. The policy of non-recognition has been adopted by members of the League and by the United States. The first move in this direction was taken when the Japanese violated Chinese territory and created the Kingdom of Manchukuo. No member of the League has yet recognised officially the existence of that puppet State. TII6 Republic of San Salvador is the only country that has yet taken that course. But it seems certain that if Great Britain were to recognise Italian sovereignty in Abyssinia, a country that was formerly a member of the League, it could hardly withhold recognition of Mapchukuo where, according to the Japanese, the new State was created by the united efforts of the citizens of the country. Further, it would mean a very pronounced break in a poHcy on which the English-speaking countries have in the past agreed, and that would not be allowed to pass unchallenged either at Home or in the Dominions.

Many ardent supporters of the League of Nations would see in the official recognition of ItaHan rule in Abyssinia a vital blow to that organisation. It would be particularly distressing to the small States which look to the League to provide a measure of support for their territorial independence. Against this the reaUsts will contend that Italy has wiped out Abyssinian independence and is proceeding to strengthen its hold on the African State, so that the only practical course is to recognise the fact, especially if recognition can be used to bring the Fascists into line once more for the improvement of conditions in Europe. But the French, whose outlook is usually very practical, have expressed the opinion that recognition would simply be made the occasion for another outbreak of Fascist frenzy, with renewed claims for the superiority of the corporative State and for the defeat of the democracies. There appear to be one or two differences between the views of the British people and the Italians that are not solely of a psychological nature.