Evening star., 1933-02-05
BRTTAIN'S DEBTS STAND
WILL SPEAK FOR EUROPE
Delegates at Parley Here to Seek Change
in U. S. Attitude de-Dangers Bind
Nations to Common Goal.

Herein. too, lies the secret of the
French policy since the default Of De.
cember Is. The French have known
at all times that the British were bound
in advance to defend the Lausanne
recognized that if America demanded
payments from England in excess Of
the British share in the reparations
settlement, the British would have
either to make good such excess from
their own pockets or call upon France
and Italy to supply the difference. They
have known that In such case Rome
and Paris would be free under the
terms OF the Lausanne agreement to
call upon Germany for larger payments.
And that would mean the end Of Lau-
same to return to a condition Of Eu-
ropean chaos.
AS result the French are in a
position to wait and see. If Great
Britain succeeds in bringing the United
states to accept a settlement within
the limits of Lausanne, France must
Deneht because she is an equal partner
in the Lausanne settlement. In that
case she can regularize her situation
IN the United States by paying the de-
ferred December installment. But II
no Anglo American settlement proves
possible, then France will only be one
OF the defaulting great powers, for
Britain and Italy must follow in June
the example she set in December.
One OF the most obvious of de.
lusions in Washington is that the So
called united front" Of the European
powers in the matter Of war debts Is
political cabal which can be broken
by insisting upon private negotiations
with individual nations and tempting
one or more of these countries with
extra special favors In reality the
united front of European powers Is
oaSed not upon political agreement but
community Of interest. Nothing which
American craftsmanship can do will
change the basic fact that all the
european powers, Germany included,
are are equally interested in getting rid Of
the reparations snarl. And, of course
LOT Identical reasons. they are inter-
ested in abolishing war debts,
Similarity Is Striking.
Between the French view Of the Hoo
yer project Of connecting debts and dis
armament and the British Judgment on
the Roosevelt conception of ioinine war
debts and the gold standard there is
striking similarity. The French have
always refused to bargain in the mat
Ter OF disarmament because, while they
naturally desired reduction in debt.
they were unwilling to compromise
their security to obtain this reduction.
Exactly in the same way, the British
now refuse to incur the risks incident
to q return to the gold standard merely
to obtain favorable debt adjustment.
In the matter of disarmament the
french asked that, in addition to debt
reduction, they should obtain some in
0f
counterbalance reduction of their mill
tary forces. In the matter of the return
to the gold standard the British are
presently bound to ask for some interL
national agreements which will prevent
repetition of the events which drove
them of the gold standard originally.
And. obviously, debt reduction. however
upon French military or British finan-
cial security.
What is not vet clearly enough real
lied in this country is that the possi-
bilities for bargain in any debt discus
sion between Britain and the United
States are rigidly restricted. This re-
striction arises out of the fact that the
British have already envisaged the
problem as having but two conceivable
solutions: American cancellation, to
conform to the Lausanne formula, and
British default. They still hope for the
former, but they also are completely
reconciled to the latter, If America can
not be converted.
The British are not coming to Wash
ington to negotiate in the ordinary
sense of that term. They are coming
with their minds made up precisely as
the French went to the Geneva Arms
Conference last Winter and the Ger
mans to the Lausanne Teparations meet
ing last Summer. What Is in prospect
is not a conference but a conformation.
The familiar SMILES of a bargain coun-
ter and a poker game are equally in
appropriate. for the British are not
coming to trade or to play a game of
chance. On the contrary they are COM
ing to attempt to persuade the United
States to accept solution to which
they have already committed themselves
irrevocably. And American rejection Of
this solution will automatically insure
British default in June. Moreover,
British example will inevitably be fol-
lowed by such nations as preserved their
good standing in December.
Disagrees With johnson.
My friend Hiram johnson is wholly
accurate. of course. when he says that
cancellation means in practice the
transfer of the burden of the war debts
from foreign to American shoulders. He
Is. too, at least completely consistent
when he demands that this result should
be accomplished, if at all, by European
reputation rather than by American
cancellation. And in this preference he
is supported by an overwhelming ma
jority in the present Congress.
But this means Of scaling down war
debts is the only alternative existing
since Great Britain imposed the Lau-
same agreement upon Europe. In fact,
it has been the only choice remaining
to any American Government since the
moment of the Hoover moratorium. All
that has happened since that moment
has happened logically and inevitably.
(Copyright, 1880