The Waikato Times. MONDAY, MARCH 17, 1941. RESPONSIBILITY FOR FRANCE

Waikato Times, Volume 128, Issue 21372, 17 March 1941, Page 4

The Waikato Times. MONDAY, MARCH 17, 1941. RESPONSIBILITY FOR FRANCE

Admiral Darlan has threatened to force Britain to make a concession on what is admittedly one of the most difficult problems of the war. Forty million French people, and many more millions of other peoples, are suffering serious hardship because they have fallen under German domination and incurred the penalty of the Allied blockade. Admiral Darlan has said that if Britain does not allow French ships to carry supplies to France he will invoke the aid of the French Navy to convoy those ships. Britain has contended that supplying France is tantamount to supplying Germany, for the Germans are seizing every available ounce of foodstuffs in France. It is argued that France’s hardship has been caused by Germany stripping the country, and that the responsibility is therefore Germany’s. Further, Germany has declared that there is ample food in Europe for all requirements.

In the first place there is not a doubt that Britain has every sympathy for the French people and earnestly desires to relieve their suffering. Indeed, that is one of the reasons why the war is being fought. But would not even France’s suffering only be prolonged if Britain allowed supplies to reach the country only to fall into Nazi hands ? France has been conquered by Germany, not Britain, and the conqueror cannot, or should not, be allowed to escape the responsibility of feeding those whom he has placed under lock ancj key. No tribunal on earth could hold in equity that Britain and not Germany has incurred the onus of supplying the enslaved people. Should Germany be allowed to benefit from her violent aggression by having a new source of supply made available to her ?

The argument of sympathy and common humanitarianism has been put forward strongly, and it has caused British and American people painful searching of heart. On this account a number of ships bearing medicines and other vital supplies and foods have been passed through the blockade. These have, of course, simply relieved the Germans of the duty of providing France’s requirements. Were it possible to feed France without at the same time supplying Germany—the enemy of France herself and of all civilisation —there is no doubt what Britain’s reply to Admiral Darlan’s claim would be. But the French vice-Premier has himself failed to present any tenable case. He has not proved that supplies passing through the blockade would not aid Germany in her assault upon the rest of the world. He blames Britain for what the world knows are the sins of the Germans.

There is another and important aspect of the matter. Can Germany afford not to reasonably supply France and all the other oppressed nations of Europe, or at least leave to them a sufficient portion of their own produce ? If Germany drives the many millions of enslaved peoples to utter desperation the new German empire is bound to collapse in chaos and bloodshed. Hitler knows that, but at the same time he is in sore need of supplies to continue his conquests, and he is determined if possible to make someone else produce those supplies. If he fails he will be compelled to leave to the conquered peoples sufficient food to keep body and soul together.