FROM MAY 3 TO JUNE 3
THE ETHIOPIAN PROBLEM
Italy’s New Empire. —On May 9 before a vast throng facing the Palazzo Venezia, Premier Mussolini proclaimed the annexation of all Ethiopia, the assumption by King Victor Emanuel of the title of Emperor, and the appointment of Marshal Badoglio as Viceroy with full powers. Decrees confirming the annexation and creating the new empire were later passed unanimously by the Italian Chamber and Senate. Thus, at war costs of perhaps $1,000,000,000, and in the face of European opposition and trade disruption, Italy completed the acquisition of a vast addition to her African domains, amounting to 350,000 square miles with a population of some 10,000,000. Its practical value as a source of wealth and an outlet for population still remains to be proved.
The Future of Sanctions. —After the Ethiopian conquest British feeling as regards the future of the League and particularly of the League sanctions policy stood sharply divided, both in the press and in the Cabinet. On the one hand the great mass of liberals who had cast 11,000,000 votes for the League and howled down the Hoare-Laval compromise now found themselves humiliated and chagrined by the League failure to save Ethiopia. Italy, they insisted, must still be denied a victory. On the other hand, more practical-minded statesmen favored meeting half way Premier Mussolini’s bid for Anglo-Italian reconciliation, as evidenced in his statement that Italy was ready for peace and had no designs on British interests in the Mediterranean basin. A sound agreement on these lines would be welcome both to England and France, as strengthening the anti- Nazi front and tending toward general European stabilization.
In the immediate confusion of opinion, however, and in view of the impending change of ministry in France, the League resorted to its usual policy of delay. Meeting on May 12, the Council decided to recognize for the time being the continued existence of an independent Ethiopia by the seating of her delegate, Wolde Mariam Ayeleu, whereupon the Italian representatives led by Baron Aloisi made a dramatic exit from the Council and were soon recalled to Rome. Next day the Council passed a resolution continuing the sanctions until the next meeting on June 16, though Ecuador and Chile gave notice of their decision to end the restrictions without delay. In point of fact, the sanctions can be formally called off only by the coordinating committee of 52 nations; hence it appeared possible that the Council at its June meeting might again defer action till September, thus “saving face” for the League while the sanctions themselves die a natural death. Even though they should be ended immediately, the sanctions have already caused an immense dislocation of trade and a drain on Italian finances.
England and the Mediterranean. — Despite the withdrawal of warships from the Mediterranean after the fall of Addis Ababa, England’s resolution to maintain her interests and dominant sea control in these regions was evident in the energetic rearmament program of the Baldwin government. This included not only a current naval building appropriation of $350,000,000 to $400,000,000 but also strengthening of air force material and personnel, inspection of 900 plants for increased munitions production, and appointment of a committee to study the problem of food supply in war time. Speaking in the House of Commons in the last week of May, Premier Baldwin declared:
In view of the decision of the Italian Government to annex the whole of Ethiopia and the consequent menace to our position in Africa and the Near East, His Majesty’s Government have made it clear in unmistakable terms that under no circumstances will interference by Italy with the existing regimes in Egypt and Palestine be permitted, and any attempt to do so will be considered as an unfriendly act... to be repelled by all the means at their command. . . .
In view of the changed conditions caused by developments in the air, the question of strengthening Britain’s defense of the Suez Canal against air attack will be considered in consultation with Egypt. . . . His Majesty’s Government are responsible for the administration and government of Palestine in accordance with the terms of the mandate, and intend to discharge their responsibility to the full.
The reference to Palestine was no doubt prompted by the outbreak there of serious anti-Jewish disturbances among the Arab population, in which during May some two score Jews and Arabs were killed. On May 25 Foreign Secretary Eden stated that protests had been lodged against anti-British propaganda radioed every week from Italy to this region and to India in the native tongues.
Against Italian expansion in the Levant the sole barrier is British sea power, while on the other hand the Italian Navy constitutes the chief menace to Britain’s hold on the Mediterranean route to her eastern possessions. In this situation it has been suggested that Italy may come forward with a proposal for neutralization of the whole Mediterranean, on the same basis as that now applying to the Suez Canal. Of such a scheme Mr. Edwin L. James wrote in the New York Times (May 24):
The effect of any such arrangement would be to put at the mercy of a mere treaty the safety of the British lines of communication through the Mediterranean. It is certain that no British government would wish to accept any such proposal. But what may worry the British is the effect of their refusal to entertain the suggestion. It might well give Mussolini what he would regard as sufficient reason to increase his naval forces to an extent which would make them more of a threat than they are now to British hegemony in the Mediterranean.
The French would no more than the British wish to see a neutralized Mediterranean. They have their vast North African colonies to think about. They could not afford to go along on any proposal which would weaken their naval position on the great inland sea. In fact, it would, in the last analysis, be much more to the interest of France to have Britain continue her dominance in the Mediterranean. And so the British will be able to count on the support of Paris in trying to block a move which might result in time of crisis in Italian control of those waters.
Turks’ Fear of Italy. —The recent demand of Turkey for refortification and control of the Dardanelles is evidently based at least partly on fear of a second conflict with Italy, which, according to a correspondent in close touch with Near Eastern politics, the Turks fully expect sooner or later. Without international support, Turkey would probably fare badly in a contest with the present military strength of Italy. Little, it is believed, has yet been done toward actual strengthening of the Dardanelles defenses, the “new Turkey” is largely a false front, and the Turkish supply system would soon crumble in a modern war.
EUROPEAN POLITICS
Questions for Germany. —Germany decided to take her time in replying to the queries on her foreign policy presented by the British government in May, and indicated that she would reserve her answers until she had further knowledge of the make-up and attitude of the new Socialist Ministry in France. While this delay was embarrassing to England in her attempted role of mediator between France and Germany, it obviously worked to the advantage of the Nazis. While negotiations were stalled, the refortification of the Rhineland would be carried forward, and with the lapse of time the reoccupation, if it did not become more palatable, would become more definitely a fait accompli.
While these motives prompted delay, the British queries themselves presented no serious difficulties. They concerned chiefly the following points: (1) to what extent Germany carried her condemnation of all arrangements based on the Treaty of Versailles, and to what extent she could be depended on to observe future treaties; (2) her willingness to enter into non-aggression pact with the Soviet Republic, Lithuania and other smaller states of Eastern Europe; (3) her attitude toward an air pact. The question of her military preparations in the Rhineland was not broached, nor was the question of her revived colonial demands.
Meanwhile, although the international situation thus played into Germany’s hands, her internal financial and economic straits would seem to threaten a new political upheaval. Her rearmament expenditures for the past year alone have been estimated at $400,000,000, and it was reported in May that British banks and business houses had been warned to refuse further German credits and demand payment of any loans not tied up beyond recall.
Left Rule in France. —The final results of the May parliamentary elections in France gave the Popular Front or Left Bloc a clear majority with 381 votes, as compared to 115 for the Center parties and 122 for the Right. The Socialist leader, Leon Blum, accepted the responsibility of forming a Left ministry, but delayed its final organization until the meeting of the new parliament in the first week of June. His key policy in foreign affairs, he announced, would be co-operation with England, and his chief aim—though this was not announced—would be maintaining a strong barrier against German expansion. Despite the traditional antimilitarist policy of the Left parties, there will be no weakening of French armaments, for no groups in French politics are less in sympathy with the Fascist and Nazi dictatorships on France’s eastern frontiers. The first concern of France is always the Rhine, and she would be best pleased by an end of the sanctions and a reconciliation between Britain and Italy that would bring these two nations again into a united front against German aggression.
Schuschnigg’s Coup in Austria. —By a sudden Cabinet reorganization on May 14 Chancellor Kurt Schuschnigg of Austria broke with Prince von Starhemberg and his army of 150,000 Heimwehr followers. The Prince lost his place as Vice- Chancellor and a decree on May 21 made the Chancellor sole leader of the “Father- land Front” and head of the new volunteer militia designed to supplant the various factional “armies” of which the Heimwehr was chief. Prince von Starhemberg set out for Rome but apparently got no support from Mussolini, who had already telegraphed to the Chancellor “best wishes for continuance and success.” While the Clerical element is for the moment supreme in Austria, it must lean one way or another—toward the fascist Heimwehr, the Austrian Nazis, or the submerged Social Democrats, all of whom remain powerful factors in Austria’s disturbed politics.
NAVAL NEGOTIATIONS
Anglo-Soviet Parleys. —Negotiations for an Anglo-Russian naval pact that would link the Soviet Republic up with the London treaty opened in England on May 20. Soviet acceptance of the treaty limitations must be secured before England can accomplish her much cherished desire of bringing Germany also into the agreement, but the early negotiations showed the Soviet government a stiff bargainer. For one thing, Russia sought to separate her Baltic naval strength from her strength in the Far East, and was unwilling to accept any limitation of tonnage or types in the latter region that was not applicable also to Japan. Nor was she ready to exchange building plans with other powers lest they be revealed thus to the Japanese. While the Soviet Republic thus sought an agreement applicable only to the Baltic, Germany has made it clear that she will submit to no restrictions not fully binding on her chief possible opponent to the North.
Naval Pact Ratified. —The United States Senate on May 18 ratified the new London naval treaty, without dissent, without much discussion, and also without much belief in its efficacy as a factor in limiting armaments. From official sources, however, there were hints that the Japanese, having asserted their equality claims, would be in no hurry to start a building race, and might convey information regarding their building plans to the British, with permission that they be circulated thus among the other treaty powers. Ambassador Davis was even quoted as expressing a belief that Japan would ultimately join the agreement.
Meantime it was revealed in May that Great Britain had requested the United States and Japan for consent to retention of her destroyer and cruiser tonnage beyond the quotas assigned in the 1930 treaty, which does not expire until the end of this year. The American view was that this could be done only by resort to the “escalator clause,” which would automatically extend the same privilege to the other signatory states.
UNITED STATES AND LATIN AMERICA
New American Trade Pacts. —The trade treaty between the United States and Finland signed on May 18 was the sixteenth of such agreements concluded by Secretary Hull under the Trade Agreements Act of 1934. Of all these various treaties perhaps the most important is the Franco-American pact, which was signed earlier in May. This ends a long-standing tariff disagreement between the two countries and affects a trade which in 1935 amounted to $58,000,000 in imports from France and $117,000,000 in exports. Concessions to France include a reduction of tariff on 71 items, notably wines and liquors, whereas France has promised lower duties or increased quotas for the import of fruits, automobiles, and numerous manufactured articles, the value of American goods thus benefited amounting to about 21 per cent of our total exports to France.
Pan-American Conference Plans. — The committee of diplomats engaged at Washington in preparing a tentative agenda for the coming Pan-American Conference submitted on May 19 their proposals to be approved by the 21 nations who will take part. The proposals were classified under six heads: (1) organization of peace, including proposals for an inter-American court of justice, (2) neutrality rights and duties, (3) limitation of armaments, (4) juridical problems, including codification of international law and elimination of intervention to settle pecuniary or other private claims, (5) economic problems affecting trade, travel, and communications, and (6) intellectual co-operation. Approval was called for by June 30, but it appeared likely that the date of the conference might be postponed till next autumn, after the United States elections.
Bolivian Upset. —In May Bolivia followed the example of Paraguay by overthrowing the old political parties, ousting her President, and setting up a kind of state-socialistic dictatorship under Colonel David Toro. As in Paraguay, the new government is based on the support of the army and disgruntled ex-service men. In its professed aim of social betterment for the impoverished Indian peon class which constitutes three-fourths of the population, it is sure to meet stiff opposition from the wealthy upper class who have hitherto controlled the government through the old political parties. Evidences of this reactionary movement are already reported in Paraguay.
FAR EAST
Trade Drive in North China. — Along with the heavy re-enforcement of its troops in North China, which has again threatened a crisis in Chino-Japanese relations, the Tokyo government has for many months been using its control over the “autonomous” regimes in the northern provinces to flood China with Japanese goods. Under Japanese pressure the East Hopei government of Yin Juikeng reduced by about three-fourths the tariffs on goods entering the area under its control. Through this open door, as well as by direct smuggling, Japanese goods enter North China and are shipped thence to Chahar, Shantung, and as far south as Shanghai. Attempts of Chinese officials to stop smuggling are condemned as violations of the Tangku Truce, and, on the other hand, in answer to British and American representations, the Japanese deny responsibility for the debacle of Chinese customs enforcement and collections.
In addition to this joint military and economic penetration, it was announced in May that General Matsumuro, successor to General Doihara as chief engineer of the expansion movement in China, had established headquarters in Peiping, with the ultimate political aim of uniting North China and Manchukuo under Emperor Kang Teh (Henry Pu Yi).
Japanese-American Trade. —Upon the failure of the projected “gentlemen’s agreement” by which Japan was to have restricted the export of cotton cloth to the United States, President Roosevelt on May 21, under the flexible provision of the 1930 tariff act, increased the duty on such goods on an average of about 42 per cent. This was calculated to check the small but increasing sale of these goods in the American market.
In Central America, Japanese trade has shown a falling off in 1935 as compared with the previous year, the exports to these states declining from 43,000,000 to 36,000,000 yen. In South America her exports increased in the same period from 61 to 73 million yen, chiefly due to Argentina’s increased import of Japanese textiles. United States trade with all Latin America in 1935 showed an increase over the preceding year of 24 per cent in imports and 12 per cent in exports.