SIR,—Can I hope that you will print the following observations
answer- ing Mr. Harold Nicolson's "Marginal Comment " in your issue of January 16th, 1942?
r. Mr. Nicolson regards any forecast of the future design of Central Europe in 1942 as " fantastic " and futile. He seems to be unaware of the fact that apart from Sir Frederick Leith Ross' Committee various other British Government departments are engaged in the very enter- prise which Mr. Nicolson with intellectual aloofness regards as " fantastic." Moreover, does he assume that the recent treaty between the Greek and the Yugoslav Governments, though concerned with the future peace in the Balkans, would deserve the same scathing and
ill-founded criticism, as the problems of collecting and transporting food in the Balkans might even be more urgent than in Central Europe?
2. Mr. Nicolson blames the German imigres for their lack of co- operation amongst each other If he would care to study the history of political emigrations he would perhaps be less surprised. Further- more, there are various sociological types of German emigris which can hardly be brought into one general concept. (a) There are those many thousands who in business, pioneer corps, factory, art and science and other ways of life quietly help the British war effort. (b) There are the few politicians " who do the talking and the writing. Whether the latter will have any influence at all in shaping the future of Central Europe is more than doubtful.
3 Mr. Nicolson is frightened of " anti-Semitism." Yet he himself while enjoying the hospitality of two Jewish acquaintances in Berlin anno domini 1928 noted in one of them " the smile of racial satis- faction." I am sure Herr Streicher would be delighted to deliver the illustrations to Mr. Nicolson's most tactful remark.
Previous page
