"The Plan Is Unrealistic But a Challenge To Thought," says

New Zealand Listener, Volume 12, Issue 298, 9 March 1945, Page 6

"The Plan Is Unrealistic

But a Challenge To Thought," says

PTON SINCLAIR’S .§ article is a challenge to thought. His specific scheme is, I think, unrealistic. But some of the ideas that lie behind it dig deep into the source of Europe’s troubles, and compel us to ask ourselves what we are going to do about it. Few thoughtfui people will quarrel with the argument that to break up the economic unity which Germany has built up in Europe would be an attempt to put back the clock. If the result of the war is to split Europe up again into separate states--each trying to make itself economically self-sufficient, each maintaining its own army, its border guards, and its customs officials-we shall be condemning Europe to poverty, dissension and, in-all probability, another war. If the Allies have nothing more to offer than a return to the old ways, some European communities may well think

that the restoration of nominal freedom -for to many it will be no more than nominal-is a very disappointing recompense for all that they have. suffered. The truth underlying Upton Sinclair’s plan is that the only cure for a German-dominated Europe is economically to lift up the poorer states of Central and Southern Europe. This must be done not merely for the sake of the individuals who will directly benefit from it. "We need ‘to establish in Europe a number of ‘states equal in political ‘and economic stature for the sake of. peace. A Germany which is outstanding above its neighbours may again become a menace, and must be policed and’ kept in restraint for a very long time by those who have the power, A Germany . which is oné among equals will be much less dangerous and can be admitted much more quickly to the common life of the world. Three Essential Conditions I have said that Upton Sinclair’s Free ‘State is not, in my opinion, realistic. The nations will not and should not put the drawing of a new map of Europe into the hands of industrialists. It is not sound for a state to be governed partly by a senate representing its foreign customers. A free trade area, covering part, if not all, of Europe, and splitting up existing states, is not a sound suggestion. The territory covered by an industrial cartel is not necessarily an appropriate unit for a single political administration. But a plan of economic unification can quite properly be brought into’ effect in a Europe which adopts a political Act of Confederation or Unification. Any such Act must deal with three matters which are essential conditions of permanent peace. The first is to arrange for the limitation and joint control of the armed forces of all. Europe. Until this is done, occupation by the Great Powers must continue. The second is some constitutional provision which will ensure the political and personal liberties of the peoples of Eurape, and provide a safeguard against the revival of tyranny and persecution. The third is the co-ordination, direction, and

control, in the economic field, of mat‘ters which no longer fall appropriately within the limits of small and separate nations. These, topics include inter-state commeérce, ‘transport, and control of the heavy industries. Apart from economic reasons, the last two- and particularly the heavy industries on which munitionmaking capacity depends-must be dealt with on a Continental basis. for military reasons. Importance Outside Europe The Great Powers, and all those outside Europe who have been involved in the World War, are entitled to ask Europe to. put her house’ in order in . these three respects; for the settlement in Europe will be a major factor in _world" peace. These questions mainly concern Europeans themselves. But the organisation which comes into being in _ Europe will be an integral part of any

world organisation, and is, therefore, of vital importance to everybody. There are various ways in which such a European authority could do what Upton Sinclair hopes to achieve. It might, with the technical and financial help of the Great Powers, set up a public corporation to take over the vital parts of the Nazi economic octopus. In view of the national interests involved, its board should be representative, as well as technically expert. Alternatively, the authority might lay down rules governing interstate cartels. These organisations would be a looser form of association, but it would still be possible to wise them to assist and guide the decentralisation of European industry. Indeed, it might well be that different methods would be applied to heavy industries, to financial combines, and to commercial associations.

These are, however, details many of which cannot now be settled. What can be done now is to begin to plan a political organisation, within which schemes for adjusting or remodelling ‘the economic integration of Europe can go forward. Otherwise we shall quickly find ourselves bogged down in the muddles and complications involved in trying to fit the broken pieces of Europe into their own little boxes, and all enthusiasm and hope will evaporate in a series of wrangles about frontiers, constitutions, and restitution. Some may dismiss any suggestion for unifying Europe as Utopian. But a mere return to the past will be for the people of Europe arid and unsatisfying. A plan that offers Europe a hope of economic betterment is essential, and it is to be hoped that those who have the responsibility have been getting down to the practical job of devising one.