I am constantly striving to discover the essential differ- ence
which separates those who believe in appeasement from those who believe in the policy of collective resistance. Each side ardently desires the same object, namely the avoidance of war ; it is in regard to the methods by which that common purpose is to be achieved that controversy arises. One side believes that by conciliation and manoeuvre we shall at least be able to gain valuable time ; the other side contends that the policy of progressive surrender has enabled our opponents to gain invaluable ground. The former argue that " anything may happen before the final crisis comes " and that therefore every day gained for peace is of inestimable advantage ; the latter, while not denying this contention, point out that if many more strategic posi- tions are occupied we may be faced, when the final crisis does come, with a balance of power which will leave us no alternative but to push appeasement to the ultimate conclu- sion of capitulation. The present Government are striving, perhaps rightly, to adopt each of these two methods and to run both with the hare and with the hounds. Many of us would feel happier if the symbol of the hare were to intrude itself less frequently upon their consciousness. * *
Previous page
