CO537-3702 — Page 49

767

Foreign Affairs HOUSE OF COMMONS

[MAJOR LEGGE-BOURKE.] believe that there has been a further re- duction in our national sovereignty than when it was imperilled at the end of the war. I believe that there is nothing dis- graceful about national sovereignty and that we should aim at it and build it up by the most favourable means possible. But I do not believe that that means is through the United Nations. The longer we remain members of the Security Council the longer our prestige is going to go down in the world. The time has now come where we have to take very rapid and decisive steps to try and bring the Western countries and the British Commonwealth and Empire together. We should accept the fact that so long as we remain members of the United Nations we shall do nothing but harm to ourselves, very little good to anybody else and only serve the ends of the Soviet Union which is determined to split the world into two.

2.23 p.m.

Mr. M. Philips Price (Forest of Dean): My reason for asking to intervene in this Debate is because I have just returned from Central Asia and the Middle East. My purpose is to say something about the repercussions of the cold war in Asia and how it may react in Europe. There are three important points in the world where the cold war is on in the Far East, the Middle East and in Europe. In this respect, however,

we must be realistic. It is no use thinking, as the hon. Member for Broxtowe (Mr. Cocks) seemed to think when he spoke yesterday, that by a friendly gesture to the Soviet Union we can solve this difficulty. We require to be ready to make whatever overtures are possible in Moscow, and to meet whatever they may be ready to make to us. But we ought also to be ready to resist by force if necessary all attempts of the Soviet Union to impose their will upon areas which we consider absolutely vital to the maintenance of the free way of life in the world. We want no repetition of what went on in Czechoslovakia in the spring of this year. Outside the main zone of Soviet Russia's influence we must resist.

I agree that the cold war with Russia is of comparatively recent date, which encourages me to believe that Russia may possibly think again. Three years ago I remember that the voice of Moscow

110 A 34

Foreign Affairs

769

768

was very different from what it is today. The kind of thing that was being said then was that Socialism was inevitable throughout the world, but that it would come in different countries in different ways and there was no need to force the pace. Only two years ago Mr. Stalin gave an interview to a correspondent in which he said that Russia was still interested in the American Loan. That was before the crisis in the winter of 1946-47 in this country; the coal crisis and the further development of the dollar crisis in the spring and summer of 1947, which made the rulers in Moscow think that the hour had now come and that it was possible to throw over all conciliation and to adopt a more drastic line. The answer of America, Western Europe and those States associated with them, must be that we can solve the economic problems, and then I believe that we shall see a change in Russian Policy.

Meanwhile the Communist Parties throughout the world have been nothing more than instruments by which the Soviet Union is attempting to impose on the world

its spiritual Imperialism. Russia in its foreign policy advances its ideas in Tsarist times, Tsarist ideas and in Communist times, Communist ideas- first in one part of the world where it thinks there is a weakness, then in another. It has clearly received a check in Europe, and now it has switched to Asia. This is nothing new. The other day I came across a letter written by General Skobeloff in 1875, to Emperor Alexander the Second, when he was leading the Russian Armies in their advance across Central Asia. He wrote:

"The stronger Russia is in Central Asia the weaker Britain is in India and the amenable she becomes in Europe."

more

That I believe is true even in 20th century India has gone but the whole question is surroundings. The British Empire in

still whether the Indian Sub-Continent, and Southern Asia for that matter, will follow the Western way of life or whether it will follow the Soviet way of life. Morcover the faster Russia advances across Asia the further she will tilt the scales in the direction of making it diffi- cult to realise the Marshall Plan in Europe. Once again Russia hits at a weak spot in Asia to attain her ends else- where, just as in 1881 she hit at Britain in Afghanistan in order to attain her ends

10 DECEMBER 1948

Foreign Affairs he Balkans and in Constantinople. Plus ca change plus c'est la meme chose.

Are we then facing a third world war? I do not think so. We are faced with a re-creation of the Eastern question which troubled our fathers and our grandfathers so much. I do not think that Stalin comes in the same category as Hitler. He does not want a war. He wants the fruits of war without war if possible, and I think he will go a very long way to avoid it. But we must make it quite clear that beyond a certain point he will get war if there is anything like the military aggression which there was in Persia in 1945 or in Czechoslovakia early this year. Therefore, we cannot neglect defences, any more than our fathers and grandfathers did in dealing with Russia. In 1881 Gladstone came down to this House and asked for a credit of £12 million for war preparations if Russia advanced beyond a point on the Afghan frontier. To this day Russia is where she is in Central Asia because he made a firm stand in 1881.

Mr. Platts-Mills (Finsbury): Before the hon. Gentleman moves from the point he was making about what he calls the advances of Soviet power in other countries, would he explain to the House whether he means that if the French people were to decide to have a Left Wing Government we should then invade France to prevent it? That is what I understood him to say.

Mr. Philips Price: The French will not decide to have a Left Wing Government, sc the question hypothetical. I do not propose to build up my speech on hypotheses or to waste the time of the House in this way.

Mr. Platts-Mills: The whole of the hon. Gentleman's speech is built up on hypotheses.

Mr. Philips Price: We cannot try to defend a government in the Eastern part of Europe which is directly under Russia's immediate control. We cannot do that because we cannot get there, but we can say that if any force is used West of a line Stettin-Trieste, if any attempt is made to interfere with the integrity and independence of the Turkish Republic or the Kingdom of Persia-

110 A 35

Foreign Affairs

770

Mr. Platts-Mills: That is East of the line.

Mr. Philips Price: It is nothing of the kind. I use the line in Europe, Stettin- Trieste. In any case Turkey is certainly outside the line of Russia's sphere. Everything shows, by the way the Turkish Republic is developing, that she has no use for the Russian way of life. Having visited Persia, Afghanistan and the Arab countries recently, I say that they are left alone they also will have no use for the Russian way of life. Therefore, I say that West and South of that line we must take a strong course.

In China a difficult situation has developed. There the circumstances are different. I feel strongly that Com- munism cannot be resisted by force alone. Communism can only be resisted by setting up against it a form of society which is equitable and fair, and where corruption in high places does not exist and there is no oppression of the poor. That is not true of Nationalist China today. There can be no question but that the advance of Communism in China is entirely due to the rottenness of the national regime there. Com- munism is advancing because the Chinese peasants are sick of the exactions of land- lords and moneylenders and because there is corruption in high places. The Chinese peasant is ready to accept the totalitarian regime of Communism which at least gives a man his daily bread.

Great Britain cannot do much in the Far East owing to her economic weak- nesses, but at least we can advise our friends in the United States, from our superior knowledge of the Far East over many generations. We can tell them what are the true facts about China. With the best intentions in the world our American friends have failed to realise the needs for reform in nationalist China. They have poured money and arms into that country-into a bottomless pit. Until the really progressive non-Com- munist China evolves which will give economic liberty as well as personal liberty to the people, which they will not get under the Soviet regime, there will be no chance of stemming the tide.

So also is it true in the Middle East. In Palestine the United States have shown a recklessness and irresponsibility which has encouraged the extremist elements