FROM APRIL 3 TO MAY 3
THE RHINELAND PROBLEM
Locarno Powers Delay Action. — Concerted action of France, England, and Russia, with their trail of smaller League states, against Germany on the one hand for her violation of the Rhineland, and against Italy on the other hand for her all too successful warfare in Africa, was rendered difficult by the fact that the two problems were inextricably linked together, and by the further fact that action of any sort by France was made difficult by the concurrent election campaign at home. Hence the mid-April meeting of the League Council could be considered successful only to the extent that it postponed decisive moves for another month’s time. On April 10, following a meeting of the League Council, the Locarno powers reached two conclusions: (1) that Germany up to that time had made no effective contribution toward a solution of the Rhineland issue, and (2) that Britain should be given a month’s time in which to question Germany and if possible clear up difficulties and misunderstandings that prevented adoption of the 25-year European peace schemes which both Germany and France had proposed. One question asked would certainly be as to Germany’s “colonial equality of rights” mentioned by Herr Hitler as a condition essential to Germany’s return to the League. And another would be as to the security of Eastern Europe and guarantees for the status quo of all the Germania irredenta lost by the war. Reports on these matters were expected before the next meeting of the Council on May 15.
In the meantime the French European peace plan aroused little discussion. It called for a kind of European super-state, within the framework of the League, to regulate revision of treaties, guarantee international law, and control an international military body with which to enforce its decisions. There were to be no territorial changes for 25 years. The plan looked good on paper, but was condemned in Germany as a collection of discarded or unworkable ideas.
Staff Conferences. —While action on the Rhine problem was delayed at Geneva, France, Britain, and Belgium indicated some solidarity of policy by arranging a series of naval, army, and air staff conferences which began in London on April 15. The actual work of these conferences was of slight consequence, aside from the indication that France was not worried over her own defense lines and looked to England chiefly for air and naval support on the Belgian frontiers. The real significance lay in the evidence thus given of British willingness to supply if necessary the military assistance pledged at Locarno.
THE AFRICAN WAR
League Efforts Blocked. —The first business of the League Committee of Thirteen (which is the League Council without Italy) at its session beginning on April 10 was to find out the progress and possibilities of League mediation in the African war. Needless to say, the results were nil. Italy’s best offer was direct discussions with Ethiopia, to take place not at Geneva but across the lake at Ouchy, of the results of which the League would be kept “informed.” Furthermore, there was to be no armistice pending Haile Selassie’s surrender. Since neither Ethiopia nor the League was quite ready for such an outcome, the committee was forced a week later to report its peace efforts of failure. Then the committee, transforming itself into the council, passed a resolution the gist of which was a statement that Italy was still making war “contrary to the Covenant,” and a “supreme appeal” to Italy that she end the war in the spirit that the League was entitled to expect of a charter member. As a further hint, the resolution cited the anti-poison gas protocol of 1925, which was binding on both belligerents.
The question of stiffer sanctions was deferred till the next committee meeting on May 11. Immediate action was out of the question. Decisions of any kind by France might react the wrong way on the elections only two weeks off. As for England, Foreign Minister Eden had been definitely warned by the Cabinet that sanctions involving military action, such as closure of the Suez Canal, were not to be thought of unless supported by all League powers. With the collapse of Ethiopian defense early in May, it appeared likely that the whole sanctions policy might soon be abandoned.
Effect of Sanctions. —Figures issued by the League of Nation secretariat in April gave evidence that even though the League sanctions had failed to stop the African war, they had done serious injury to Italy’s economics and finance. Between November and the end of March Italy’s exports dropped 62 per cent and her imports 24 per cent. The net result was that Italy had lost at least half her gold and foreign exchange reserve held on October 20, and this drain of gold, according to the League experts, was continuing with “increased rapidity.”
In enforcing the sanctions, Britain had cut down her exports to Italy by 62 per cent and her imports from Italy by 51 per cent. The corresponding figures for France were 42 and 26. American purchases from Italy had increased 27 per cent and sales to Italy had fallen off only 10 per cent. American sale of oil had doubled, but was still only a small part of Italy’s total import.
EUROPEAN POLITICS
New Spanish President. —Early in April the Left majority in the new Spanish Cortes voted almost overwhelmingly (the Right not participating) in favor of ousting from office the first President of the Spanish Republic, Niceto Alcala Zamora. The action was on the technical ground that President Zamora had exceeded his powers in twice dissolving the Cortes and calling new elections, although it was by the second election that the Left parties regained control. The election of his successor, who would be the first to be selected by constitutional procedure, was to be carried out on May 17 by an electoral college composed of the Cortes and an equal number of electors chosen by popular ballot three weeks before. Results of this earlier vote made it certain that the new President would come from the Left parties and that the choice would probably be Premier Manuel Azana. As Premier, Azana has favored strongly socialistic policies, including radical land redistribution and governmental control of industry. His aims have been summed up in the phrase “a very left republic,” but should his radical supporters force too rapid a swing toward socialism, the result might quite possibly be an outbreak of civil strife.
Left Gains in French Vote. —The run-off parliamentary election in France on May 3 confirmed the earlier victory for the Popular Front of Left parties, including the Radicals, the various socialist groups, and the communists, who will probably control about 375 of the 618 seats in the new Chamber. Of these the communists alone will hold a solid bloc of over 70 votes. Of the 10,000,000 votes cast in the first election on April 26, it was estimated that about 2,000,000 went to the Right, an equal number to the Center parties, and the remainder to the radicals. The effect of the election on French foreign policy is not altogether clear. Though in general opposed to armaments, the Left parties are obviously strongly anti- Fascist and anti-German. However serious the situation abroad, the immediate issues in the election were the urgent domestic problems of economics and finance. The trend of the election was interpreted, not as favoring any party or policy but as a vote of protest against previous conditions and government.
Schacht Superseded. —The declining influence of Dr. Hjalmar Schacht as director of German economic and financial policies was apparently indicated by the announcement on April 27 that General Hermann Goering was to exercise supreme authority over all problems relating to raw materials and foreign exchange. Since the matter of foreign credits and purchases lies at the bottom of most of Germany’s economic difficulties, this change was taken to signify supersession of the one man who has at times dared to take an independent stand in Nazi politics. However, after a conference with Reich- führer Hitler on May 2, Dr. Schacht decided to retain his posts as Minister of Economics and head of the Reichsbank, perhaps not altogether displeased that the bulky General should stand as a buffer to take responsibility for some of the less palatable economic measures called for by Germany’s situation today.
Fears for Austria. —Practical renewal of compulsory military service in Austria, which has followed in the wake of Germany’s disregard of treaty restrictions, has presumably been accepted by Austria’s tutelary states as a necessary safeguard against the menace of German expansion. Reports late in April indicated, moreover, that Austria’s spring maneuvers would effect a massing of troops along the German frontier. No doubt, in view of Italy’s preoccupation in Africa, an Austrian coup looks tempting to Germany at the present time, but news from Berlin indicated no present intention of giving another stir to the diplomatic soup kettle already set boiling by her outbreak along the Rhine.
EASTERN EUROPE
Turks Seek Straits Control. —Germany’s garrisoning of the Rhineland and Italy’s aggressive moves in the Levant prompted the Turkish government on April 11 to a vigorously renewed demand for remilitarization of the Dardanelles. As provided in the Turkish Straits Convention signed at the time of the Lausanne treaty in 1923, Turkish fortification of the Straits is restricted, and when Turkey is a neutral she must permit the passage of belligerent war vessels in a strength not greater than that of the strongest fleet possessed by a Black Sea power. Restoration of Turkish control of the Straits is strongly favored by the Soviet Republic, whose interests would be served by having the passage to the Black Sea dominated by the friendly Turks rather than by the stronger naval powers. The Turks themselves feel that refortification is necessary to meet the growing strength of Italy in the eastern Mediterranean and as a counterpoise to Italy’s strategic naval and air base in the Dodecanese Islands, just off the Asia Minor coast.
Of the major powers signatory to the Straits Convention, Italy alone is likely to oppose the Turkish demands. France is favorably disposed; and Britain, grateful for Turkey’s staunch support in the sanctions policy, sent a reply to Turkey promising a revision conference “without delay.” Meantime, although reports of Turkish reoccupation of the Straits Zone were denied, it is well known that new Turkish roads and emplacements assure her quick control of the waterway by mobile artillery.
Death of King of Egypt. —King Fuad of Egypt died of a heart attack on April 28, in his sixty-eighth year. He was succeeded by his 16-year-old son, Prince Faruk, who at the time of his father’s death was engaged in study at the Royal Military Academy, Woolwich, England. It was announced that a regency of three officials would exercise the royal power until King Faruk reaches the age of eighteen. In the meantime negotiations will continue on a new Anglo-Egyptian treaty, by which it is hoped to place the relations of the two countries on a permanent basis.
UNITED STATES AND LATIN AMERICA
Buenos Aires Conference Plans. — Meeting in April, members of the Latin- American diplomatic corps in Washington organized themselves as a planning commission for the inter-American conference which is to be held in Argentina this summer. A subcommittee of three was named to arrange a tentative program of subjects for discussion, which will be submitted to the various governments before final approval. The Washington State Department has indicated that it will favor the neutrality problem as a topic for consideration, presumably in the hope of reaching agreement on a common American policy. There is also strong sentiment among the Latin-American states in favor of a separate “American League of Nations,” with power vested in the central body to enforce compulsory arbitration, compel evacuation of occupied territory, and in other ways put effective sanctions behind the machinery for preventing war. On the other hand, the proponents of this plan are equally opposed to unilateral intervention or any similar measures taken by one nation to protect its citizens or interests within the territory of another state.
In connection with the neutrality issue, it is interesting to note Secretary Hull’s testimony before the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee, given last January but only recently published, to the effect that the chances were “nine out of ten” against the next war being a “general” war, and that the United States would “urge other nations to join us at the earliest opportunity in re-examining, restraining, and re-vitalizing neutral rights as they existed prior to the World War.” He added:
We might as well recognize that most of our neutral rights in the future are not going to be maintained simply on paper. . . .
We might as well realize also that while we do not stand for extravagant navies we must have enough force to command respect of other nations when we hold up to them a threatened violation of our rights to trade as neutrals.
Secretary Hull evidently recognizes that the development of our foreign trade is inconsistent with the surrender of neutral trade rights which certain isolationists have proposed.
Lopez Elected in Venezuela. —Provisional President Eleazar Lopez Contreras of Venezuela, who came into office upon the death of the dictator Gomez last December, was regularly elected President at a meeting of the National Congress on April 25. The vote of 132 to 1 indicated that General Lopez had the Congress, if not the country, very strongly behind him. President Lopez has amassed no personal fortune, and since he has headed the state, he has cut taxes, legalized trades unions, increased peon wages, and in general followed a liberal policy. As former Minister of War he also has the support of the Army, which in the troubled state of Venezuelan politics would seem the best assurance of his continued rule.
Mexico Deports Calles. —On April 10 former President Plutarco Elias Calles of Mexico, with four of his political followers, was arrested and deported by airplane across the Texas border. The deportation was justified by the government on the ground that Calles and his supporters had engaged in active plotting against the Cardenas administration, and were implicated in the recent dynamiting of a train between Vera Cruz and Mexico City, in which nine were killed and fourteen injured. About a year ago Calles split with Cardenas over the latter’s socialistic policies, including drastic land redistribution and nationalization of industries. Calles returned to Mexico last December after a visit of several months in the United States.
FAR EAST
Siberian Border Commission. —Despite the recurring military clashes on the Siberian and Mongolian borders of Manchukuo, Soviet and Japanese diplomatic representatives made progress during April toward a solution of their frontier difficulties. From Tokyo at the close of the month it was announced that an agreement had been reached providing for a joint commission to delimit the Siberia- Manchukuo boundary from Lake Khanka to the Koraan border. This agreement was facilitated by Moscow’s recession from its original insistence that the work of the commission should cover the entire frontier. On the other hand, the present arrangement apparently does not preclude an extension of the commission’s scope later on.
A still outstanding difficulty between the two nations is involved in the renewal of the treaty covering Japanese fishing concessions on the Sakhalin and Siberian coasts. Russia is reported to have offered an extension of the 1932 financial arrangements covering these concessions for a period of five years, as a means of facilitating negotiations for revision of the basic convention of 1928.
The progress of both these negotiations gave evidence of the conciliatory attitude of the Japanese Foreign Office under its new chief, Mr. Arita, who in speaking of Russo-Japanese relations declared that Japan would not cause trouble unless “others launched aggression against us.” This, he added, was in line with Japan’s fixed policy of the “regional responsibility of the great powers for maintaining peace in their respective areas.”
Alliance Rumors. —As a kind of postscript to the Soviet-Outer Mongolia mutual defense pact made public last March, Moscow in April gave assurances to China that this treaty in no way interfered with China’s claim to sovereignty over the Mongolian region and in no way laid a basis for Soviet territorial claims against either China or the Mongolian Republic. Although the Chinese Nationalists had protested to Moscow on this point, there were repeated reports during April that the Soviet and Chinese Nationalists had themselves reached a secret military alliance similar to that between Russia and Mongolia. This, however, was categorically denied both in Moscow and Nanking.
On a more definite basis was the April “agreement” by which the Hopei Autonomous Council in North China accepted the co-operation of Japanese-Manchukuo forces in a campaign “against communism.” With or without the sanction of this agreement, Japan has already taken over the administration of more than half of Chahar province and is extending her influence over the remainder of this strategically important area.