THE POLICY OF MUNICH
Sm,—Is it not time that The Spectator placed an embargo on cheap sneers at the policy of Munich? See Professor Brogan's article in your issue of September 6th.
In the light of events in France, does anyone in his right mind think that the Paris politicians would have been any more faithful to their long-standing unilateral guarantees to Czecho-Slovakia than they would have been to the guarantee to Poland, on which the ink was scarcely dry, if they had not been sternly called to a sense of their responsibility?
What must have happened if Mr. Chamberlain had not gone .o Munich amid the tumultuous plaudits of the House of Commons? Paris would have recoiled at the last moment. Britain was not ready for war to keep the Sudeten Germans within the Czecho-Slovakian State. Either then France and Britain would have been humiliated, or we should have been committed to a single-handed war when our rearmament was only beginning to show fruit. Czecho-Slovakia, with the western defences turned by the occupation of Austria, would have been overrun in a week; Prague anticipated the shambles of Warsaw.
We can only dimly see the shattering reverberations of France's policy of Eastern guarantees, based on bluff, undermined by unpre- paredness, political division and intrigue—a policy futile after the re- occupation of the Rhineland and the construction of the Siegfried Line. It is too early to discuss the problems so created. But it is not too early vehemently to protest against gibes at the courageous action which gave at Munich a last chance of peace, and provided the Commonwealth with the opportunity to gather its forces in a unity which may yet save Christianity and keep alive the divine spirit of liberty and freedom.—Yours truly, STANLEY REED. House of Commons.
Previous page
