The publication of the fourth White Paper since 1935 on the subject of British rearmament, and' the speech made by the Prime Minister, Mr. Neville Chamberlain, in the House of Commons on the same subject should leave no doubt in the minds of other governments of the determination of Great Britain, not only to continue to develop her defences, but to persist in her endeavours to bring about a general appeasement of the existing worldwide tension. It is no figment of imagination when he describes as "enormous and almost terrifying," the power which the nation is now building up, nor is he unduly optimistic when he believes it will have a sobering and steadying effect upon world opinion. It has been felt by men of the type of the Prime Minister that the policy of Great Britain during the past twenty years, animated as it undoubtedly was with the best of intentions in the service of world peace, failed largely because of the fact that in her enthusiasm for the limitation of armaments Great Britain had disarmed to such an extent that she had lost much of the authority of her voice when dealing with international questions. There was undoubtedly in some of the chancelleries of Europe, and possibly elsewhere, a steadily growing opinion that it was possible to disregard Great Britain with impunity. It is to that that many of the developments which have occurred all over the world can be traced, the British lion was regarded by some as a decrepit, mangy old beast with an enfeebled roar and an incomplete set of teeth. The animal it was felt by some could be completely ignored except on occasions when it was felt that a little tail-twisting would add to the gaiety of nations. With astonishing rapidity all that is being changed. It is a costly proceeding and immense sums of money are being, and will continue to be spent until the completion of the programme in 1941, but, if the event proves the correctness of the Prime Minister's view that in Great Britain's preparedness is to be found the best guarantee of world peace, it will be money well spent, though there will always remain the regret that it could not have been spent on better and more productive objects.
That regret must be tempered by the knowledge that that sum now believed to be considerably in excess of the originally estimated £1,500,000,000 must be regarded as an insurance premium, insuring not only against the probability of war, but also against the danger, should such a war break out, of Great Britain being inadequately fitted to meet the heavy responsibilities which would then devolve upon her. Powerful as are the forces which are now in preparation, they are not be be used for aggression, Great Britain has no need to follow such a policy, but it is essential that she should be able to protect her interests wherever they may be threatened, and it may be taken for granted that by the time the five year rearmament plan has been completed she will be in a position to do so. Simultaneously with this development, Mr. Chamberlain is still doing his utmost to bring about the appeasement of Europe, and he has emphasized that no past memories and no present misrepresentations will deter him from doing what he can to restore confidence and tranquillity of mind in Europe. It is possible that, as it is impressed upon the world at large that Great Britain will meet every threat of competitive armament with all the resources that she has at her disposal, Mr. Chamberlain's work for peace will prove more successful than have the efforts which were made under the zgis of Earl Baldwin and Mr. Anthony Eden. Mr. Chamberlain has obviously abandoned the ideological basis upon which former foreign policy was erected, and applying to present conditions the policy of realism seeks to bring about a reformation in world political trends which may yet secure much of that which the League of Nations failed to achieve. It is significant that while Mr. Chamberlain claims to be a better friend $32 he emphasized in his speech to the Commons that to-day it is mutilated, halt and lame. That fact had sooner or later to be openly recognized. The commencement of the rearmament scheme in 1936 was a covert recognition of the fact, but a greater degree of reality has been imported into British foreign policy by these recent open admissions. Hence the Prime Minister was able to inform the House that it was significant that generally speaking, throughout the country, there was a conviction that the course embarked upon when rearmament was begun was unavoidable.
Opposition to the Prime Minister's motion asking for approval of the proposals contained in the White Paper took the usual lines. Opposition Labour condemned the building of immense armaments to further "the dangerous foreign policy undertaken by the Government in defiance of its election pledges," and, insisting that the safety of the country and the maintenance of peace could only be attained through collective security under the League, was stated by Mr. Lees-Smith to be willing to provide the arms necessary to implement such a policy. It is a paradoxical argument when the facts are considered. Labour endorsed rearmament when it was first proposed. There was then, it is true, no suggestion that the British attitude towards the League would undergo any material change: now that there has been some modification Labour is opposed to what is now planned. But such paradoxes are the natural outcome of the continual clash between ideals and reality, and it is fortunate that the Opposition in the House of Commons is of such dimensions as to offer no threat to the continuance of the present coalition in power. By majorities of over two hundred the Labour amendment was defeated and the Government's resolution carried. Those figures undoubtedly represent the actual state of mind in the country at large, though probably the division was taken under party whips. They are an indication that there is very little real danger now of an election being forced, as it was thought at one time, following Mr. Eden's resignation, would be brought about, and that Mr. Chamberlain can proceed with his policy for the general appeasement of Europe confident of more than sufficient support in Parliament for his purposes. They are indicative of more. They show the world at large that the aforetime timidities in British foreign policy are passing away, that Great Britain is becoming increasingly able to follow a positive policy. Therein lies the promise of ultimately effective contributions to the peace of the world. The time has not yet come for the idealistic lamb to seek to lie down with the very realistic lion, though it is perfectly apparent that, so long as the lamb is equipped with means of self defence, it will be able to command a degree of respect which normally it would not obtain. Another paradox, perhaps; but then, the world is full of them nowadays.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.