LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
[Correspondents are requested to keep their letters as brief as is reasonably possible. Signed letters are given a preference over those bearing a pseudonym, and the latter must be accompanied by the name and address of the author, which will be treated as confidential.—Ed. THE SPECTATOR] SIR,—Mr. Chamberlain claims that he has won peace with honour, and also " peace for our time." Presumably he means that Hitler will be able to make any further conquests that he may desire without actually attacking any fundamental interest of the British Empire, and that, therefore, it will not be necessary for us to go to war with him. It is possible that he may be right, if the words " our time " are taken to mean the declining years of a man who has practically attained his three score years and ten ; and if we refuse to regard as a fundamental interest of the British Empire the preservation of the independence of the States of Eastern Europe, or the immense strengthening of a Power with which, one day, we shall have to come to a reckoning.
On the day before the Munich agreement, the great majority of British people had come to see the situation as a decision whether the world was to be run according to civilised prin- ciples, or at the caprice of the bullying and blustering of the German Dictator and his Italian satellite. They had made up their minds that the world would be no fit place for freedom- loving people if the latter method were to prevail, and also that the triumph of the Dictators would sooner or later bring the British Empire into direct danger of extinction. For these two reasons, they had made up their minds to accept the disagreeable course of fighting a fearful war, rather than suffer Hitler's methods to prevail over civilised principles. In the event, however, Mr. Chamberlain decided otherwise, and the bullying and blustering of Hitler is now firmly entrenched as the directing force of European affairs for some years to come.
Herr Hitler affirmed to his new German subjects in his speech at Eger on October 3rd that he was carrying out stage by stage the programme set forth in his book Mein Kampf. The early stages of this programme involved re-militarisation and the annexation of Austria and parts of Czechoslovakia. The next steps include expansion over the greater part of Eastern Europe, and the eventual destruction of Soviet Russia from which the Ukraine is to be torn) and of France. If and when these steps are accomplished, Herr Hitler will be in the position of the Roman Republic, and we in the position of Carthage. It will be extremely difficult for the British Empire to maintain its independence if it has to fight alone against a Germany which controls the resources of nearly the whole of Europe. Thus, the programme of Mein Kampf, taken as a whole, comprises a clear threat to the existence of the British Empire ; and this threat applies equally to the Empire, seen as a formidable political combination, and as a region of comparative civilisation and personal liberty.
One day this threat to our safety will have to be met by definite armed resistance. It is a matter of policy at what stage we decide to meet it. One plan would have been to meet it at the stage when aggressive intention first became plain, that is to say when Hitler showed himself willing to go to war to realise his immediate aims. That stage was reached in the last days of September, and after the public had got over the first shock of realising the imminence of war, it ranged itself with a high degree of solidity upon the side of standing up to Hitler now rather than later. However, Mr. Chamberlain had a different appreciation of the relative advantages of a stand now or• a stand later, and accordingly he conceded to Hitler his immediate objective, and forced compliance upon the Czechs.
A second plan is to wait until Herr Hitler actually threatens this country. He may do this at some intermediate point in his programme, but the probability is that our turn will not come until quite late in the proceedings, after Eastern Europe and perhaps the Ukraine are already acquired and digested.
If we wait so long, the task of defeating him ultimately will be so formidable that it is doubtful whether we shall be able to manage it at all. Every British statesman must hope that we shall not be thus left face to face with our doom, friendless and alone.
The third plan is to choose some intermediate stage, at which we shall say to Hitler (and mean it) " thus far and n farther." But where is that stage to come ? If we would not fight for a strong and democratic Czechoslovakia, willing and able to help herself, and eminently deserving of our help, shall we fight to maintain the technical independence of a Republic which, before very long, will probably be semi- Nazified and entirely under Hitler's influence ? And is there any virtue in the Hungarians, or the Poles, or the Yugoslays, or the Rumanians, which was not present in the Czechs ? The fact is, no individual item in Hitler's programme (until he comes to the last) seems to be worth fighting about, taken by itself ; but the programme as a whole is worth resisting to the last drop of our blood, for (leaving aside our sympathy with small nations and with democracies) our own freedom is involved.
Hitler has reached that stage in his career which Napoleon attained after the battle of Austerlitz. Now, as then, Czecho- slovakia is the scene of a struggle which seems likely to decide the fate of Europe for a number of years. It is inconceivable that Hitler will now lie down upon his gains and turn himself into a sort of placid, bourgeois ruler. He will pursue the course of annexing territory where he chooses, creating vassal States where that seems preferable, and forcing unwilling but exposed neighbours into alliance with himself. Eventually, perhaps, he will meet his Moscow, and then the countries subordinated to him will one by one find themselves free to throw off his yoke and join in his overthrow. What will the British Empire contribute to his fall ? Not, let us hope, an Olympian indifference to Eastern Europe, and an aristocratic disdain of Soviet Russia.
Whatever reforms or improvements Hitler may have effected in Nazi Germany, we ought not to gloss over the evils of his system under the designation of mere " ideological differences." For most of us, there is still some meaning in the terms " right " and " wrong," and a system which persecutes Jews because of their race, Catholics and Protestants because of their religious convictions, Liberals, Socialists and Communists because they venture to use (whether wisely or not) the brains that God has given them, is wrong. Moreover, a system which studiously suppresses truth, wherever it can be found, and disseminates lies and slander by every means of propaganda ; which encourages spying and denunciation, and cramps the minds of the young into the warped framework of its own maniacal conceptions, is a regime that is not merely to be dis- agreed with, but resisted and repudiated as we repudiate dis- honesty and sordid crime in our own community. The victory of Munich means that Wrong has triumphed over Right in Europe, and will continue to triumph for a considerable period of time. Ultimately, it can only be brought down with the help of the British Empire—a help that would have been far more effective, if it had been given last month, when a strong Czech army stood upon its fortifications, ready, with us, to " meet the embattled corners of the earth, and shock them."
We have lost our Austerlitz. We must get ready for Waterloo. Meanwhile, there is still the Peninsular War.—
Yours, &c., VANDELEUR ROBINSON. 65 Marsham Street, S.W. r.
Previous page
