New-York tribune., 1921-12-04

%h~'sAAA cs'Ae PioftNC0 S'uiNJft N4bH Sug
opportunity for such denunciation Of
French policy as France had resorted
to when Lloyd George had private
conversation with a German statesman
in the matter Of Upper Silesia.
Respective Points of Views
Show Amazing Divergence
In the course of the last few weeks
l have talked with scores OF French
and British representatives and jour
nalists here in Washington. Between
the points Of view Of the two groups
there is gulf which seems almost i'm
possible to bridge, and it is easier to
understand now than ever before this
radical divergence Of British and
French opinion, which has, at least.
partially paralyzed European recovery
for more than three years. The old
/ saying that one mans meat is another
mans poison was never more clearly
disclosed as accurate. The Englishmar
believes that Germany is pacifed--
honestly believes it. On this a3sump-
ton rests the hope of a speedy re-
sumption Of trade. And this trade does
not represent mere sordid profits. IL
represents the difference between life
and death for England herself.
The Frenchman, or the other hand,
belieyes-and honestly believes--that
Germany is not pacifed; that if she IS
permitted to recover without paying
she will presently complete what she
began in 1914, and France, as great
power, France as an independent ma
ton in the world, will disappear.
You have two nations, each confront
ing calamity without limit for itx
own people, and each in the eyes of the
other inviting calamity to an ally in
the hope of saving itself. The intensity
Of feeling and the apprehension in the
mind of each produces enormous cx-
aggeration, and yet, with all due allow
ance for this, the American must rec
ognize the fundamental basis in the
claim of each.
Now, one may ask, what will be tha
result Of this latest rumpus? VIII IL
wreck Mr.. Hughes's naval program ?
No. The French have not the smallest
intention of inviting the evil conse-
quences which would Immediately fol-
low preventing or impairing success at
Washington by over-insistence upon the
submarine program. Their gesture in
this respect, whatever basis of reason
1t has in the minds of certain navsl
experts, was an answer to British at
tack upon their army and not the dec
iaration of policy. Mr.. Balfour al
ready has indicated frankly, generous
iy, sympathetically, that the British
government does not purpose to call
the French army in question here In
Washington.
But beyond Washington there lies
the fact of the European crisis. II
France and Great Britain cannot work
together Europe is going to be ruined
as consequence, and no one can mis-
take the fact that the effect of Wash
ington upon the French will be to lead
them to pursue more Independent pol
icy than in the past NJ. BRAND has
saved the French army from any cx-
ternal pressure in Washington. The
army remains an effective means for
collecting the German debt and COM
relling German disarmament. IF Ger
many does not pay, France means 70
use ner army. The use of the army
VIII bring immediate injury TO Great
britain. Therefore we shall have Brit
lsh protest, British opposition and
british criticism, perhaps more intense
IN the future than in the past.
Dispute Doesn't Threaten
Success of Nayal Holiday
To believe that this means that Great
Britain and France are going to fight 1.
nonsense. On the other hand, to be-
Deve that France is going to be re-
strained any more by British warnings
is equally mistaken. France is going
to interpret the result of the Washing
ton conference as leaving her free 10
consult her own interests with respect
to Germany in Europe. She is going to
accept the moral Endorsement which
she reads in the Washington action OF.
inaetlon as a final warrant to pursue
her own policies, and ! think every
Englishman here appreciates that fact
aid views it with apprehension.
In sum, the English-French dispute
here does not threaten the success OF
Mr.. Hughes's naval holiday or Of the
Washington conference itself Much
less does it mean any campaign of sub
marine preparation by France against
Great Britain. 1t does mean taat while
Anglo-French cooperation in Europe is
. g sine qua non Of European reorganiza-
ton, the hope of such cooperation has
been gravely threatened by the quarrcls
in the American capital. And ths hope
that the Washington conference might
. contribute to ameiiorate European con-
ditions has been rrespondin~ly di-
minished.
The quarrel has now been transferred
, from American to European shores
The United States has no -anger any
Immediate concern in the skxle- But
we have been treated to an amazing
illustration of the difficulties which lie
D in the xpov cf world oaaCa Siuee fuo