CO537-3702 — Page 104

691

Foreign Affairs HOUSE OF COMMONS

[MR. LINDSAY.]

put it was new-that Europe was freed from tyranny by two extra-European powers, one a distant one and one very near. Therefore, it was difficult for Europe to regain its independence as a civilisation. As he put it, Europe was once the centre of civilisation, but today

appears as a sort of no man's land where two giants meet in conflict.

The question I have been asked is whether I think Europe can be recon- structed as an independent civilisation. All I have noticed being done so far under Article 3 are some seven radio talks by scholars, economists and others. If my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary can tell me what other steps are to be taken, I shall be obliged, for surely something else could be done. I know there are cultural conventions, Mixed Commissions and all the rest of it, but what, in fact, is being done? Could it not be described with a little more magic and imagination so that the people will feel that there is some link between the people of France, Belgium, Holland, Luxemburg and this country beyond the economic and political?

a

May I refer to a further question? Hon. Members may have noticed in yesterday's "Manchester Guardian report which is being published on the German universities. I understand that General Robertson set up this Commis- sion, no doubt with the good will of my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary. I regard this report, about which Lord Lindsay of Birker published an article, as probably the most important land- mark and possibly even a turning point in the democratic development of Ger- many. It is absolutely basic that if we are going to get any change in Europe- and I do not apologise for riding my own hobby horse there has to be a complete change in the educational systems of Europe.

Mr. Platts-Mills: Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that the only change we can get in the educational institutions is when we get a complete change in the social form of Europe?

Mr. Lindsay: I could not disagree more. As a matter of fact, there have been considerable changes over a period in this country. I should say that three years ago we had the moral leadership in education in Europe, and one of the

109 N 34

Foreign Affairs

reasons why I am so upset about the failure of U.N.E.S.C.O. is that we have lost that leadership. That is one small point. If my hon. Friend the Member for Finsbury (Mr. Platts-Mills) is regard- ing the Slav countries-whose systems I have, as far as I can, taken great pains to study-as a model then, my gracious, if we really mean we want a system of education which from the age of three to the age of 23 is completely controlled by a central organisation then-

Mr. Platts-Mills: The hon. Member talks about a central organisation, but can he say to what extent he justifies his assertion about education starting at three when we all know in those coun- tries education does not begin until the age of seven?

Mr. Lindsay: My hon. Friend is quite wrong. I am sorry to have to correct him, but not only do they begin com pulsory education at seven, but there has been a greater advance in the "under sevens than in any other country in the world, at any rate on paper.

23

My point is that the moral alternative to Communism is not a Conservative Government in Britain and it is not a Socialist Government in Britain, because Communism is more of a creed than a series of political and social devices. To- day one hears of strikes, political up- heavals, and black marketeers, but one never hears of the other hunger in Europe-the hunger for a return to stability, to learning, and of friendship with this country. Students and pro- fessors are beginning to move again. My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has done something to assist this. The music and the arts are beginning to go from one country to another. men, scientists and various professional groups are again in contact after six years of separation. As between Austria and this country, a large number in the last three years, amounting to over 1,000, have moved from one side to the other.

Church-

What I want the Government to do is this. The Government have made notable progress in many fields in the question of European unity but they want the critical but steady support of public opinion on major issues which transcend party politics and loyalties. That is one reason why The Hague Conference was an important landmark-simply and

9 DECEMBER 1948

Foreign Affairs solely because it rallied a large propor- tion of European opinion as had not been done before.

of educational,

I made a suggestion one year ago in "The Times" that there should be some form of conference which was a counter- part to the Marshall Plan. I suggested that this country take the initiative in calling conference

a university and other leaders at some point in Western Europe. I know that the response from Leyden, Louvain, Rome, Paris, Chicago and Harvard would be immediate. Unless something else is done besides the purely political and economic to make this alternative to Communism a reality, we will not get the enthusiasm of the people and the million and a half of students between Aberdeen and Athens, between Oslo and Graz, who look up and are not fcd. They are the prey to any doctrine which comes along, not only because they are hungry but because no alternative is at present being supplied.

9.52 p.m.

Mr. Janner (Leicester, West): Unfor- tunately, there is not much time left to deal with the subject which I under- stood would be the main subject of the Debate but I would like to say one or two things on Palestine in order perhaps to allay the anxieties of some of my hon. Friends who happen to be on the Con- servative benches. They seem to be under the impression that the only people who at any time have advocated the Zionist cause, which means the estab- lishment of the Jewish State in Pales- tine, were the Socialists who undoubtedly did categorically state what they thought about it. May I refer for a moment to the statement made by the man who knew most about this position? It was the late Mr. Lloyd-George. He said:

"The Balfour Declaration represented the convinced policy of all parties in our country and also in America. Men like Mr. Balfour, Lord Milner, Lord Robert Cecil and myself were in wholehearted sympathy with the Zionist ideal.”

I believe hon. Members cannot fail to understand what was meant by this:

The same thing applied to all the leaders of public opinion in our country and in the Dominions, Conservative, Liberal and Labour."

Today, at long last, we have again heard in this House important speeches which indicated a return to the Balfour

109 N 35

694

Foreign Affairs

ideal and to all those sentiments which were expressed and understood when the Balfour Declaration was sent to the late Lord Rothschild. It proyed categori- cally that it was in sympathy with the Jewish Zionist aspirations and with the Zionist ideology that this was given, and that it was with a view to its being brought to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation, which was the representative body of that movement in this country. I do not understand what has happened of late in some of the intermediate years to dampen the feelings which were so visible at that time.

Has the Jewish effort in Palestine been anything other than that which is required and acclaimed by the United Nations organisation or any other civilised organisation today? Has not the development of the land in Pales- tine itself, in the years in which the Jewish people have been working there, indicated that what Sir John Boyd Orr is demanding of the world has actually been performed in that country which was desolate and which has been re- created to the advantage of the world? Is not that in itself sufficient to entitle those who have performed that miracle, because of their hard work backed by their sentiment, because of the regard that they had for that land, to consider themselves as a State, worthy to be accepted by the civilised world as a State and to be accepted into the unity of civilised States? It is perfectly obvious that we are running our heads against a stone wall if we attempt to deny the right of Israel to its statehood. Some 19. nations have acknowledged it.

The late Count Bernadotte made cer- tain proposals but he did not say that any of those proposals were sacrosanct. On the contrary, if hon. Members will read his report, they will see that what he said was that it was not for him to decide upon policy. He was merely indi- cating what he thought after three and a half months' examination of the situation. The United Nations organisation had examined this for years and the League of Nations had examined it for years. Count Bernadotte said one thing which is important to note, namely, that he found as a fact that the Jewish State was in existence, and he found as a fact that the State of Israel was to continue. He stated that in the basic premises of his report.