OCCUPATION OF COLOGNE. (Hansard, 18 December 1924)

THE MARQUESS QUEZON OF KFDLESTON

My Lords, I think I can answer the Question put to me by the noble Earl with sufficient brevity, though not quite so briefly as the form in which he has put the Question to me. The conditions as regards the evacuation of the Rhineland territory, are, as the House is aware, laid down in Articles 428 and 429 of the Treaty of Versailles, of which I need, only read Article 428 and the first part of Article 429. The former article runs as follows:— As a guarantee for the execution of the present Treaty by Germany, the German territory situated to the west of the Rhine, together with the bridgeheads, will be occupied by Allied and Associated troops for a period of fifteen years from the coming into force of the presents Treaty. The first clause of Article 429 is as follows:— If the conditions of the present Treaty are faithfully carried out by Germany the occupation referred to in Article 428 will be successively restricted as follows: 171 (i) At the expiration of five years there will be evacuated: the bridgehead of Cologne and the territories north of a line running along the Ruhr, then along the railway Jülich, Duren, Euskirchen, Rheinbach, thence along the road Rheinbach to Sinzig, and reaching the Rhine at the confluence with the Ahr; the roads, railways and places mentioned above being excluded from the area evacuated. The subsequent clauses of the same Article refer to the evacuation at the end of ten years and the further evacuation at the end of fifteen years, the Article providing, as the House will see, for a progressive evacuation at the end of each of three quinquenniums. As is well known, what is commonly called the bridgehead of Cologne is that part of this area which is in the main, but not entirely, occupied by British troops.

The first thing I would like to remind the House of is this, that the question of evacuation at the end of this quinquennium is not a matter which concerns us alone. It is an Allied issue, the terms of which are laid down by Treaty. The British Government cannot act independently in the matter, but can only act after consultation with its Allies The second point which I have just indicated, although it does not seem to be generally known, is that the sole occupants of this bridgehead are not the British forces, but the British forces along with Belgian forces and along also with a small portion of the French occupying forces.

If I might refer again to the words of the Treaty that I have read, the House will see that the condition under which the first stage of evacuation can take place is that the Articles of the present Treaty are faithfully carried out by Germany. That is the test which has to be satisfied before evacuation can proceed, and, of course, that test covers the whole area of the provisions laid down in the Treaty and accepted by Germany when she signed it.

As regards Reparations we all of us hope that since the acceptance of the Report of the Dawes Committee and the execution now taking place that aspect of the case may be regarded as solved, and, provided Germany loyally carries out the Dawes Agreement, we hope that no question of default will arise in that particular. The question is rather a dif- 172 ferent one when we come to the military conditions laid down in the Treaty. There the Allies have to be satisfied that the military conditions are being faithfully and fully carried out by Germany before advantage can be taken of this Article. As regards that point the situation is this. We are awaiting the Report of the Allied Military Mission of Control whch has now been engaged in inquiring into the military situation in Germany for more than two months. It is impossible, I am told, that its Report can be received before January 10, 1925, which would be the exact date on which the first quinquennium expires, and if the House inquires how it is that this Commission has not been able to complete its labours within this period, it has been due, I am bound to state quite frankly, to the constant and persistent obstruction which its labours have met with during the last two years at the hands of Germany. This has delayed the proper ascertainment of the facts of the case, and when the Report has been received—and I hope now it will not be very long delayed—the Allies will proceed to discuss between themselves to what extent the terms of the Treaty have been fulfilled and whether the first stage of evacuation can then be carried out. Those are the facts of the case.

Upon the case viewed in its wider aspect His Majesty's Government have not the slightest desire to continue the occupation. The sooner that occupation comes to an end the better from our point of view, and the better from the point of view of Europe. We want to get back to the stage of general pacification, of a resettlement of the disordered conditions of the central part of the Continent, and naturally the continued presence of foreign troops in that area does not conduce to that end. Those are the general desires of His Majesty's Government; but for the reasons I have named it is not possible to take the action suggested by the Treaty at this moment.