Other formats

    TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

The New Zealand Railways Magazine, Volume 4, Issue 9 (January 1, 1930)

Independent v. Inter-dependence: Briand and Foch

Independent v. Inter-dependence: Briand and Foch.

Is a portent to be found in the fact that the year 1929 closes with something of a clash between the spirit of Briand and the spirit of Foch? “There was a dramatic incident in the Chamber of Deputies” (reports a cablegram of 27th December) when a Deputy read a document, signed by the late Marshal in 1926, opposing evacuation of the Rhineland before the date fixed in the Versailles Treaty. M. Briand, now Minister of Foreign Affairs in the Tardieu Government, said he was ignorant of the document's existence. No one is ignorant, however, of the fact that Foch sought for France the Rhine frontier. He blamed the Clemenceau Government for not putting it in the Treaty. And, if the greater includes the less, how could Foch have been expected to condone premature evacuation of territory that he considered should never have been regarded as evacuable? But though there seems to be no reasonable ground for surprise at the Foch relic, the incident is none the less symbolic. All transport progress (sea, land, air) tends to annihilate distance and create a smaller world; economic evolution and the inter-locking ramifications of modern commerce tend to drive races, castes, creeds, and colours together; but the counterdrive of nationalism, based on history and racial traditions, is directed to maintaining the gap. Amid mighty centripetal and centrifugal forces, Briand dares to propound his United States of Europe. But the U.S. of Europe is not an issue. Disarmament is. The first question in 1930 is this: Can Briand lead France into a naval reduction scheme on the scale contemplated by Britain and the United States? French concessions in the Versailles Treaty were given on the understanding that President Wilson could secure from the United States Congress guarantees for France. That hope the Senate killed; and France has not forgotten. The goods Clemenceau bought at Versailles were never delivered. What consolation will France claim when the English-speaking seakings come before her in their new mood of naval self-denial?