Analytics Consent

We use analytics to understand better how people are using this site.

Permit Google Analytics?

Yes No
Skip to main content
Read page text
page 1
THE TABLET A WEEKLY NEWSPAPER AND REVIEW PRO ECCLESIA DEI, PRO REGE ET PATRIA PUBU3HED AS A NEWSPAPER VOL, 185 No. 5471 ____________ LONDON, MARCH 17th, 1945 SIXPENCE THE REPUDIATION OF LAW The New Approach to Security RUSSIA AND THE CHURCH IN EASTERN EUROPE A Policy of Conciliation, and the Longer View GERMAN PHILOSOPHY AT OXFORD I I : Homicide Philanthropy. By T. S. Gregory THE WORLD WEEK BY WEEK The French and San Francisco There is a curious inverted parallel between the bridge before Maastricht in 1940 and the bridge before Remagen in 1945 : one vital charge not detonated in time, and the victorious army quick to seize and exploit the unexpected opportunity. A passage o f the Rhine has been forced for the first time since the Napoleonic wars : and by an American Army. French jubilation is mingled with nostalgia : they think o f Condé, Turenne, Marceau, Hoche, Napoleon him self—all the historic crossings o f the Rhine made by the French leaders o f French troops—and then o f their present weakness and their dependence upon Allied arms, and it is in a sober mood th a t they give their gratitude and their congratulation to General H odges. Their minds turn a t once to the preoccupation o f security. There is no sort o f confidence in the arrangements being made. the Security Council and o f the anomalous position o f such bilateral Treaties as the Franco-Soviet, which contains a clause saying th a t neither Power will ever jo in a coalition against the other. What happens to such provisions when a matter affecting such a Power comes up before the Security Council ? No one can yet say. Nor have the French been given any clear assurance that discussion a t San Francisco o f the Dumbarton Oaks proposals will be any more than a formality, o r th a t it will genuinely be open to the invited nations to raise objections and press for amendments. The Soviet View On March 8th Tass issued a statement in Moscow, saying th a t the French had agreed to be a sponsoring Power on two conditions :— None o f the English papers has given an adequate impression o f the concern in France about the way in which the San Francisco Conference has been convened, which is the main theme o f the Paris Press, and occupies a great deal of broadcasting time also. On February 23rd the French accepted the invitation to be present a t San Francisco, extended to them by the United States on behalf o f the Yalta Powers. On February 28th the invitation to sponsor the Conference was also accepted, the official communiqué adding th a t the French Government, “ which did not participate in drawing up the Dumbarton Oaks project, later modified a t Y a lta ,” agreed to th a t text being taken as a basis for discussion, but wished to state that, in its view, “ certain amendments should be made to attain the desired a im .” The next news was a retraction on March 5th, when it was announced that, after all, France would not be a sponsor. The authoritative AFP explanation was th a t the text o f the invitations to be sent out, drawn up a t Yalta without France, seemed to the French to require acceptance o f the Dumbarton Oaks plan, with the new voting scheme, in toto. France, therefore, rejected this formula o f invitation, and M. Bidault went to London, there to be told by Mr. Eden that such an interpretation was erroneous, and that Britain also was reserving the right to propose a t San Francisco certain alterations in the Dumbarton Oaks text. Therefore on M. B idault’s return to Paris, on February 27th, the decision to sponsor was published, with the reservation quoted above. At the same time the French requested that the text o f the invitation should be revised to make it less ambiguous. Negotiations to this end were begun, but the time was insufficient. I t had been decided a t Yalta th a t the invitations must go out on March 5th, and there could be no postponement. Therefore they went out, implying (the French think) acceptance of Dumbarton Oaks not as a basis for discusssion, but as a rigid formula, and therefore without French support. Meanwhile, “ Pertinax” -in Washington, and several commentators in Paris, declared th a t the British and American Governments had been willing to meet the French point, and if necessary to delay the date for sending the invitations, but that the Russian Government had refused to do so. The Radio Paris diplomatic commentator said th a t the French wanted to ensure the full discussion o f the voting plan for “ (1) I f the wording o f the invitation adopted a t the Crimea Conference and published in the Press on March 6th were amended to insert th a t the proposals worked out a t Dumbarton Oaks and adopted a t the Crimea Conference were to be regarded not as a basis for drawing up the rules o f the world security organization, but only as a basis for negotiation. “ (2) I f the French Provisional Government was to have the right to introduce changes in the foregoing proposals during the San Francisco Conference. “ The Soviet Government,” the statement continued, “ did not find it possible to agree to these conditions, inasmuch as their acceptance would have meant in actual fact the reconsideration o f the Crimea Conference decision on this question, and would have led to a weakening o f these decisions not in the interests o f post-war security for the peace-loving nations. ’ ’ I t is added that, contrary to report, the Soviet Government had been ready to extend the time for sending the invitations for “ a day or tw o ” : but what the Russians in effect say, in a threatening way, appears to be that nothing decided a t Yalta can be altered, and th a t any attem pt to do so will gravely endanger the future o f the world. The episode has done the Soviet a great deal o f harm in France. Through the greater part o f the Press they have been condemned, Thorez and Cachin leading the minority to defend them. The MLN leads the element in the Resistance movement which is saying that the Russians are imperiously forcing the nations into signing away all their rights in favour o f the few G reat Powers who shall be above the law. France, says Pierre Corval in the Foreign M inister’s paper l'Aube, “ will be strong in her part as protector o f small nations” : and Maurice Schumann, in the same paper, quotes with approval Sir William Beveridge’s letter in The Times about the surrender o f principle, and asks whether France will “ sacrifice the rights, i f not even the independence, o f the small nations on the lines laid down a t Y a lta ,” adding :— “ The Yalta proposals have the double fault in the eyes o f France, that they sacrifice real guarantees to an appearance o f collective security, after which they sacrifice collective security to the appearance o f power.” Forty-five nations have been invited to San Francisco ; and i f the French see themselves as leaders o f the forty-five,

Page Text

View plaintext

THE TABLET A WEEKLY NEWSPAPER AND REVIEW

PRO ECCLESIA DEI, PRO REGE ET PATRIA

PUBU3HED AS A NEWSPAPER

VOL, 185 No. 5471 ____________ LONDON, MARCH 17th, 1945

SIXPENCE

THE REPUDIATION OF LAW

The New Approach to Security

RUSSIA AND THE CHURCH IN EASTERN EUROPE

A Policy of Conciliation, and the Longer View GERMAN PHILOSOPHY AT OXFORD

I I : Homicide Philanthropy. By T. S. Gregory

THE WORLD WEEK BY WEEK The French and San Francisco

There is a curious inverted parallel between the bridge before Maastricht in 1940 and the bridge before Remagen in 1945 : one vital charge not detonated in time, and the victorious army quick to seize and exploit the unexpected opportunity. A passage o f the Rhine has been forced for the first time since the Napoleonic wars : and by an American Army. French jubilation is mingled with nostalgia : they think o f Condé, Turenne, Marceau, Hoche, Napoleon him self—all the historic crossings o f the Rhine made by the French leaders o f French troops—and then o f their present weakness and their dependence upon Allied arms, and it is in a sober mood th a t they give their gratitude and their congratulation to General H odges. Their minds turn a t once to the preoccupation o f security. There is no sort o f confidence in the arrangements being made.

the Security Council and o f the anomalous position o f such bilateral Treaties as the Franco-Soviet, which contains a clause saying th a t neither Power will ever jo in a coalition against the other. What happens to such provisions when a matter affecting such a Power comes up before the Security Council ? No one can yet say. Nor have the French been given any clear assurance that discussion a t San Francisco o f the Dumbarton Oaks proposals will be any more than a formality, o r th a t it will genuinely be open to the invited nations to raise objections and press for amendments. The Soviet View

On March 8th Tass issued a statement in Moscow, saying th a t the French had agreed to be a sponsoring Power on two conditions :—

None o f the English papers has given an adequate impression o f the concern in France about the way in which the San Francisco Conference has been convened, which is the main theme o f the Paris Press, and occupies a great deal of broadcasting time also. On February 23rd the French accepted the invitation to be present a t San Francisco, extended to them by the United States on behalf o f the Yalta Powers. On February 28th the invitation to sponsor the Conference was also accepted, the official communiqué adding th a t the French Government, “ which did not participate in drawing up the Dumbarton Oaks project, later modified a t Y a lta ,” agreed to th a t text being taken as a basis for discussion, but wished to state that, in its view, “ certain amendments should be made to attain the desired a im .”

The next news was a retraction on March 5th, when it was announced that, after all, France would not be a sponsor. The authoritative AFP explanation was th a t the text o f the invitations to be sent out, drawn up a t Yalta without France, seemed to the French to require acceptance o f the Dumbarton Oaks plan, with the new voting scheme, in toto. France, therefore, rejected this formula o f invitation, and M. Bidault went to London, there to be told by Mr. Eden that such an interpretation was erroneous, and that Britain also was reserving the right to propose a t San Francisco certain alterations in the Dumbarton Oaks text. Therefore on M. B idault’s return to Paris, on February 27th, the decision to sponsor was published, with the reservation quoted above. At the same time the French requested that the text o f the invitation should be revised to make it less ambiguous. Negotiations to this end were begun, but the time was insufficient. I t had been decided a t Yalta th a t the invitations must go out on March 5th, and there could be no postponement. Therefore they went out, implying (the French think) acceptance of Dumbarton Oaks not as a basis for discusssion, but as a rigid formula, and therefore without French support.

Meanwhile, “ Pertinax” -in Washington, and several commentators in Paris, declared th a t the British and American Governments had been willing to meet the French point, and if necessary to delay the date for sending the invitations, but that the Russian Government had refused to do so. The Radio Paris diplomatic commentator said th a t the French wanted to ensure the full discussion o f the voting plan for

“ (1) I f the wording o f the invitation adopted a t the Crimea Conference and published in the Press on March 6th were amended to insert th a t the proposals worked out a t Dumbarton Oaks and adopted a t the Crimea Conference were to be regarded not as a basis for drawing up the rules o f the world security organization, but only as a basis for negotiation.

“ (2) I f the French Provisional Government was to have the right to introduce changes in the foregoing proposals during the San Francisco Conference.

“ The Soviet Government,” the statement continued, “ did not find it possible to agree to these conditions, inasmuch as their acceptance would have meant in actual fact the reconsideration o f the Crimea Conference decision on this question, and would have led to a weakening o f these decisions not in the interests o f post-war security for the peace-loving nations. ’ ’ I t is added that, contrary to report, the Soviet Government had been ready to extend the time for sending the invitations for “ a day or tw o ” : but what the Russians in effect say, in a threatening way, appears to be that nothing decided a t Yalta can be altered, and th a t any attem pt to do so will gravely endanger the future o f the world.

The episode has done the Soviet a great deal o f harm in France. Through the greater part o f the Press they have been condemned, Thorez and Cachin leading the minority to defend them. The MLN leads the element in the Resistance movement which is saying that the Russians are imperiously forcing the nations into signing away all their rights in favour o f the few G reat Powers who shall be above the law. France, says Pierre Corval in the Foreign M inister’s paper l'Aube, “ will be strong in her part as protector o f small nations” : and Maurice Schumann, in the same paper, quotes with approval Sir William Beveridge’s letter in The Times about the surrender o f principle, and asks whether France will “ sacrifice the rights, i f not even the independence, o f the small nations on the lines laid down a t Y a lta ,” adding :—

“ The Yalta proposals have the double fault in the eyes o f France, that they sacrifice real guarantees to an appearance o f collective security, after which they sacrifice collective security to the appearance o f power.” Forty-five nations have been invited to San Francisco ; and i f the French see themselves as leaders o f the forty-five,

Read next page

My Bookmarks

Buy this Book
Skip to main content