U.S.A. And The War

How Allies Are Fighting Americans' Battle

By R. W. Robson

IHAVE an American friend whose erudition and literary artistry l sincerely admire; but with whom I quarrel energetically on the subject of the present and future relationship of our two countries.

I hold the view that if only U.S.A.— the most powerful nation in the world— would line up with the British Common wealth of Nations, according to a simple formula based on democratic freedom the peace of the world and the happi ness of the human race could be ensured.

My American friend’s retorts usually could be summed up in that singularly unpleasant parody, “England expects that every American this day will do his duty”.

I have told him that he is typical of innumerable publicists, who see England simply as an unending vista of Im perialistic Colonel Blimps, who are pre pared to do anything so long as human affairs can be twisted into the shape best calculated to serve the greedy and insatiable demands of the British Em pire. I have never been able to make him —or other Americans of similar thinking—recognise that we people of British stock feel and think about human and international affairs exactly as do the Americans—that we have the same loathing for Imperialistic fire eaters, and for our inhumanly selfish trusts and combines (which are out de liberately for exploitation under the shelter of the national flag) as the Americans have for theirs.

However, as I say, this American news paperman and I squabble away very happily over our differing points of view.

But, recently, he sent me the following “five American reasons for not wishing to join up with England and France in the present war”: and I have been so interested in these reasons, and in mv own John Bullish reaction thereto (his description!) that I have ventured to put this material into the shape of an article for publication—although I admit freely, and with apology, that the subject has nothing to do directly with Pacific Islands affairs.

Here are the five American reasons, together with what I regard as an In telligent British reply:— NO. 1, —The Allies at Versailles cer tainly did not act in the complete interest of democracy, otherwise the Polish Corridor and the division of the Near East would not have been per mitted.

ANSWER:—If the settlement at Ver sailles had been implemented, as was intended by President Wilson, by a League of Nations supported by the United States, the course of history would have been very different. The League of Nations was designed to take the anomalies and imperfections out of the Versailles Treaty, just as soon as developments in Europe made such a course practicable. But when the United States Senate walked out on us, and re fused to join the League of Nations, the latter became the plaything of certain Imperialistic interests, and never func tioned as it should have done. The frightful condition of world affairs to day can be traced back to the Versailles Treaty; but that is not the fault of Britain.

NO. 2. —Americans have never for gotten, and will not forget, that while the French and British were declining to

pay their war debts to America, they were finding the money to finance inter national adventures in various other countries. Americans do not mind losing the money, but hate to be treated so cavalierly.

ANSWER; —This comment about war debts is typical of American thought, and is indicative of one of the great fallacies held by Americans. Britain and France, and the other nations, cannot pay their war debts to the United States because there definitely is no machinery by which such enormous amounts can be transferred to another country, without economic disaster. Debts can be paid in only two ways, in goods (or service) or in gold. The Americans fiercely restrict their imports of goods; and they know— or they ought to know—that if they con tinue to receive gold in this way they will be sunk. The United States already has an accumulation of, I think, about two-thirds of the world’s gold; and most of the United States’ troubles of the past two decades can be traced directly to the immobilisation of this vast accumulation of international credit. For several years the Western European nations paid their war debts to the United States in gold (because U.S.A. would not take goods) and it was that eventual “freezing up” of international credit, in the shape of gold in the United States, that was one of the primary factors in bringing about the great depression of 1930-33. If the nations can find a way to use that credit, instead of immobilising it in stored gold, there is no reason why European nations should not pay their war debts to U.S.A.; but, so far, the thing seems to be beyond the genius of statesmanship.

Britain did not use her diverted war debts money for adventure and arma ments—not at first, nor until she was forced to. For several years, Britain con tinued to disarm, until in 1930-31 she was in a highly-exposed and imperilled condition; and it was only the general re-armament in Europe in 1932-36 —the result of the final breakdown of the League of Nations —which forced Britain to re-arm.

NO. 3.—There is no assurance that, even if the U.S. entered the war, France and Britain might not make an early peace with Germany, and leave Poland massacred and Czecho-Slovakia sunk.

ANSWER:—The British people gener ally wish to see Poland and Czecho slovakia restored. That is one of the things for which they definitely are fighting. They are much more likely to achieve that aim with assistance, rather than without it.

NO. 4.—Americans sincerely fear that another world war would cost us a lot of our own democratic Institutions, such as free speech and a free press.

ANSWER:—The British people, with great reluctance, entered into the pre sent war because the events of 1937-39 convinced them that, if the progress of the totalitarian States was not checked, the democratic institutions of Western Europe would be overwhelmed and des troyed, and we should enter another Dark Age. The Western democracies in fighting for their own freedom, are fight ing also for that of U.S.A.

NO. 5. —Finally, our sympathies are strongly with the Allies, and we are tak ing practical measures to aid them. But we do not propose to drain our own country to dire suffering and weakness — with the memory of what Wilson en dured after the Armistice.

ANSWER:—One cannot blame the Americans. Probably, the self-sacrificing people of Britain and France, and the harassed neutrals, would like to be safe and comfortable in the United States, too. But what Americans do not realise

is that even their mighty nation is not secure against the menace of the totalitarian State—that, if Germany and/or Russia should dominate Europe it would be only a matter of a year or two before the United States would have to fight for its existence. The Allies to day, are fighting the battle for American freedom, as well as for their own.