THE U.S.S.R. AND BRITISH POLICY
[To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR]
am sure that many of your readers will have read with interest the letter from Mr. Korostovetz which appeared in your issue of January 6th. In common with many others I have been struck by the absence in the British Press of any reference to the important part which Russia might be ex- pected to play in the settlement of Jewish refugees. This neglect is part of the general attitude adopted by our Govern- ment and the greater part of our Press. It is all very mysteri- ous, this conspiracy of silence. No doubt it is partly due to the present Russian policy of cutting itself off from contact with the rest of the world. But that policy is largely the result of the attitude taken up by the democratic countries.
Russia is at present undergoing changes of immense import- ance, Its chief aim is no longer to sow discord in the capital- ist countries. It is suite obvious to any unbiassed mind that she entertains no aggressive designs against any other State, and, like us, is only interested in maintaining the status quo. Our interests are nowhere in conflict with hers. There have been indications in recent years of the growth of a friendly spirit towards this country. There is no reason to suppose that her enormous armaments have any other purpose than defence against the openly expressed hostility of Germany and Japan. Moreover, the Soviet record in recent years in the domain of international relations provides a striking contrast to those of the totalitarian States.
In the face of the increasingly formidable menace to the peace of the world presented by the Anti-Comintern Pact Powers and the steady spread of their influence in other lands, it surely is common prudence, even if only to save our own skins (to put it no higher), that we should adopt a more understanding attitude towards the Soviet Government.
Far be it from me to approve of much that has been going on—is still, to some extent going on—in Russia. But I submit that the more she is persuaded to co-operate with the demo- cratic States, the more rapidly will these evils disappear.
During the crisis many of us were mystified by the attitude of this country and France towards Russia. Although it had declared its intention of honouring its obligations and had moved impressive forces towards the frontiers; although, too, its co-operation in the event of war was of supreme import- ance in our state of unpreparedness, yet throughout the crisis, in all the negotiations and conferences, the State that could turn the scales was ignored and slighted. Can we wonder at her withdrawing into her shell? I am well aware that it will be argued by some that any close understanding with Russia
would only aggravate our position vis-a-vis Germany. But appeals to reason seem doomed to failure; they are regarded by the Dictators as signs of weakness. We may do well to consider whether they are not more likely to listen to more forcible arguments backed by the united might of Britain, France and Russia and the moral and material support of the U.S.A., not to mention many smaller States that would be emboldened to strike a blow for Democracy instead of sitting on the fence, as they are compelled to do at present through fear of Germany and distrust of our intentions.—I am, &c.,
T. S. PHILLIPS.
Somerfield Court, Sellindge, near Ashford, Kent.
Previous page
