THE CASE FOR COLLECTIVE SECURI 1 TY War Can Be Averted. By
Eleanor F. Rathbone, M.P. (Gollancz. 5s.) THE case for University representation, as essential to the effective operation of democratic government, is stronger at this moment than it has ever been in history. It is now the only safeguard of independence. It has given to the House of Commons members like Miss Rathbone, Mr. Herbert and Sir Arthur Salter, who can make free use of their critical or constructive judgement without regard to the interests or the feelings of party. Miss Rathbone's brilliant little book is an excellent example of the kind of service that such politicians can render to public life. It spares nobody's pride and con- siders nobody's reputation. It is a frank, realist, incisive analysis of our foreign policy, and of the various moods and ideas, prejudices and inhibitions, that make up or paralyse the public opinion of this or that party, this or that movement. As a piece of writing it is at once sparkling and serious ; its subject is as grave as any subject can be, but it is handled with a skill that will entertain its readers as much as it instructs them. It is most happy in touches that give the atmosphere of our discussions: Mr. Duff Cooper announcing to the House the capture of a British merchantman by the Spanish rebels "with the air of one making a hit " amid what The Times described as Ministerial cheers and laughter, and a Peace demon- stration resembling "a second-hand clothes shop where the faded fashions of several years ago are displayed in heaped disorder."
Mfrs Rathbone's book treats in these domestic aspects the large thnne to which Professor Toynbee devotes his scholar's mind in the new volume of his Survey. Professor Toynbee describes 1936 as a year of retreat, sometimes quickening into rout, of the forces supporting a collective system of inter- national relations. It was generally agreed after the War that the first British interest was the maintenance of those forces. If we want to see how strikingly the departure of British policy from that principle has justified that view we have only to turn to the present state of the Mediterranean. Seventeen centuries ago the admirers of the great Roman peace pointed.out that at last the trader could sail the seas with safety. Today that is not true of the British traderVeVen. on the sea where British -interests have always been held' to be involved more deeply. than on any other. If we had maintained the collective system of international relations our sailors would have been safe from drowning by pirates in the remotest sea. Having abandoned it, we are unable to protect them within - sight of Gibraltar. That is the plain moral of the history of the last years.
Miss Rathbone has not written this lively book for the mere fun of exposing or criticising mistakes. The situation is too grave for that, nor is that her role in politics. She has written it for a definite purpose. It is said that the whole idea of the collective regulation of international politics is an exploded folly and that the sooner we realise this the better. Her answer is that it has never been fairly tried, and her book is designed to show that it is still worth trying. Her main contention nobody can dispute. There has been no considered and consistent effort in British politics to support and strengthen this method. The plain facts make this clear. In 1929 Mr. MacDonald was Prime Minister and he made Mr. Henderson Foreign Secretary. Mr. Henderson was a thorough going sup- porter of the League of Nations. In 1931 Mr. MacDonald was Prime Minister and he made Sir John Simon Foreign Secretary. Sir John Simon's ideas of foreign policy were as far removed from those of Mr. Henderson as they well could be. Nobody could imagine him making Henderson's speech on the Protocol or Henderson making his speech in sup- Port of Japan. Mr. Baldwin, appointed Sir Samuel Hoare Foreign Secretary. Sir Samuel Hoare spoke on one day like Henderson, on another like Sir John Simon. Mr. Baldwin's own performance is beyond the farthest flights of satire. Sir Samuel Hoare spoke on September I Ith, 1935, at Geneva of " steady and collective resistance to all acts of unprovoked aggression" as a principle to which the British Government held "with firm, enduring and universal persistence." Mr. Baldwin approved. A few weeks later Sir Samuel. Hoare made the famous agreement with Laval far divicling Abyssinia. Mr. Baldwin aPproVed. The nation; not having been as quick as its Foreign Minister in throwing over the speech of September Itth, revolted. Mr. Baldwin approved the revolt. Then came the Italian victory, and a general flight from sanctions. Mr. Baldwin approved. Thus in a few weeks Mr. Baldwin had approved four irreconcilable policies. Could anybody say that experiments in collective security made in this spirit count for anything ?
Miss Rathbone gives her reason in this book for thinking that the forces of sanity and freedom are still strong enough in the world to offer a good prospect of success for a consistent policy that seeks to unite them against aggression. No doubt it is more difficult in one sense to counter aggression today than it would have been yesterday, for force gains more confidence with each success. The conquest of Abyssinia followed the successful seizure of Manchuria; the great intrigue in Spain followed the successful invasion of Abyssinia ; China has succeeded Spain. In one sense it is more difficult, but in another sense it is easier. For the danger of general war is more visible, and the democratic Powers have more urgent reason for giving the most serious consideration to the problem of the defence of peace. It is to be hoped that Miss Rathbone's book will be widely read. J. L. HAIVIMOND.
Previous page
