§ THE EARL OF HUNTINGDON had given Notice that he would call the attention of His Majesty's Government to the importance of ensuring the election of democratic Governments in enemy-occupied countries at the earliest possible moment after their liberation; and also move for Papers. The noble Earl said: My Lords, the subject with which this Motion deals is a most complicated and thorny one, but I think all of us must recognize the great importance of the democratic theory to-day. We have found that democracy, with any disadvantages it may have, is the one effective brake on tyranny which has yet been devised. It is the only hope, I submit to your Lordships, of giving to the peoples of Europe those promises outlined in the Atlantic Charter, and I think it would not be untrue to say that wherever oppression or exploitation is found there also you will find democracy in chains. I am sure that noble Lords will agree in principle with these theories, for His Majesty's Government have repeatedly and wholeheartedly endorsed the principle that it is democracy for which we are fighting 87 and which we mean to use as the future principle for the States of Europe. But I think we must say, although these principles have been agreed, that nevertheless certain specific cases or instances arise in which His Majesty's Government, instead of being on the side of democracy, are very often against it.
§ One of the examples most pertinent to this argument is the case of Greece. I am sure there is no one in this House who has not paid tribute and whole-hearted tribute to the great courage and integrity of the Greek people in their struggle against the might of Germany and Italy combined, but we have yet to pay deserved tribute to the even greater struggle which has been carried on by the Greeks since the Axis victory. Far greater endurance, far greater courage are called for from the people of an occupied country to fight against the invader than are needed when the whole country exists as an armed resistance movement. In Greece, as your Lordships all know, resistance started with bands of guerrillas fighting in the mountains and destroying bridges, wrecking troop trains and disrupting the communications of the Germans in every way. So successful were their efforts and so much did the movement grow that little by little it has more or less taken in nearly the whole of Greece and has spread to the cities. Strikes and sabotage have been organized against the Quislings and German Government in spite of the most violent repressions, mass executions, and all the horrors that the Germans can inflict on a subject people. In spite of all this the struggle has been carried on and the Greeks have formed what they called a National Liberation Front, which is known under the initials E.A.M. This has been made up of people of every Party who are agreed, first, on the essential need of expelling the Nazis from Greece, and secondly, in not having any form of Fascist dictatorship in that country.
§ All Parties have combined in this movement, and an army has been formed which combines all these or most of these groups of guerrillas who are continually fighting the invader and continually working against any Quisling Government that may exist. Now, what is our policy towards these Greeks? We have, as your Lordships know, recognized King George 88 of the Hellenes as the official King of the Greeks and we have recognized his Premier, Monsieur Tsouderos, the ex-Director of the Bank of Greece, as the Prime Minister in the Government. But, unfortunately, we have to call to mind the fact that the Greeks are not very trustful of their King. The reason for that is that when King George first went to Greece he swore by the Constitution that all Greek liberties should be preserved, that the Parliament should be maintained, and that' the rights and freedoms of the Greeks under their Constitution should be kept; but, as we all know, in 1936 the Parliament was dissolved never to reappear again, Metaxas was installed as dictator of the country, and, what in Greek eyes was even worse, the King supported that dictatorship even though it became in the view of the people almost as extreme as any dictatorship of Hitler or Mussolini. Those who have once suffered under the terrors of that kind of dictatorship are very hesitant before they will risk suffering under such a dictatorship again.
§ Therefore when a deputation arrived in Cairo quite recently one of their first demands was that the Greek King should not go back to Greece until a plebiscite had been taken to see whether the Greek people wished to have that form of government or not. They said they were not satisfied that the promise of the King would be kept on his return, and I do not think that in the circumstances we would call them altogether unreasonable in that demand. Their second demand, which also seems not unreasonable, was that this National Liberation Front, which claims to combine about 75 per cent, of the people—whether it does so or not I cannot say, but it certainly has a very big following throughout Greece and has put up an effective and heroic assistance —should have some form of representation in the Greek Government in Cairo, We all know that both these demands were flatly refused. It is believed, as has been stated, that they were flatly refused on the advice of the British Government and that this policy was fully endorsed by the British Prime Minister.
§ What can cause us to pursue such a policy at the expense of this gallant people and such denial of all the principles of democracy? Is the Atlantic Charter to become a scrap of paper? I 89 hope not, but it is not encouraging, and when we look at the other countries, Yugoslavia for instance, we find exactly the same policy pursued. There again there is a gigantic resistance movement which, as we have all seen from the newspapers, has had spectacular results. It has freed large tracts of land from Nazi rule, and not only that but it is believed to be employing many German divisions which are kept fighting in Yugoslavia against this Yugoslav resistance movement. We must admit that the problem there is complicated. There are various racial groups, Croats and Slovenes as well as Serbs, and before the war started the Serbs had more or less established a kind of oligarchy in which they controlled the army, trade and finance to a great extent at the expense of the minorities, the Slovenes and the Croats. Hence you find in Yugoslavia very great tension between the different racial groups. In spite of that you find in the partisan armies Serbs, Croats and Slovenes all fighting together with very great gallantry and still greater success. What is our policy? As your Lordships know, we have recognized the Government of King Peter, which is composed, if not entirely, almost entirely, of Serbs, and that Government appointed as War Minister General Mihailovitch, a great Serb general who has been frequently reported as having used his troops against the liberation movement, against the partisans and on behalf of Italy. Anyway, he is regarded as a very pro-Serb and a not particularly anti-Nazi general. Yet he is the only man recognized by the Government in Cairo, the Government which we finance and support and recognize. I suggest that we should bring very strongly to the attention of the Yugoslav Government the desirability of giving representation to the very big partisan movement which has had such tremendous success.
§ I cannot go through all the different problems of the countries of Europe, but to illustrate my point I should like to say that his lack of support of democracy seems to be very marked in our recognition of the Polish Government. One of the most courageous movements in Europe is the Polish underground movement. I do not want to dwell on the behaviour of the emigré Government here, but I think there is an extremely unsatisfactory relationship. There are many people who would like to see in 90 Europe Governments very much of the Right, Conservative Governments, and many other people who would like to see Governments very much of the Left, Socialist Governments, but I submit that if we are to avoid the most bitter strife between Left and Right we must proceed on the basis of allowing people in the liberated countries to choose the Governments that they wish to have. As soon as our invading armies manage to free a country, we should at once allow the people to choose their own representatives. We should as soon as possible arrange municipal, elections, and then find democrats who would find other democrats and arrange as soon as possible for elections for a constituent assembly. The danger is that under the pretext of expediency, perhaps military expediency, we should pursue in Europe a policy of establishing in those countries Governments, which one might almost call puppet Governments, which will not have the full support of the people of the countries in which they are set up.
§ There will be a very great temptation to do so; but if it is done not only shall we lose the support of the people of the country but we shall fail to use the resistance movements which are so vital to the success of our arms. I think a great many of the difficulties which arose in connexion with the Free French movement followed from the fact that after the resistance movement in France started, a period of two years elapsed before any direct contact was made with the resistance movement and General de Gaulle's Committee. Had that contact been made earlier, and had popular feeling in France manifested itself, I feel sure that we should not have made the mistake of appointing Darlan in North Africa with all the tragic blunders and difficulties which followed. It is only now through the Consultative Assembly that French opinion has begun to make itself felt, with, I think, very beneficial results.
§ As a last appeal to your Lordships I should like to say that not only does this affect the peoples of Europe but it will affect ourselves. The lives of thousands of our soldiers will depend on these great popular movements in the occupied countries. If we want the support of the French or of the people of any other nation we must recognize them. We must not fall into the trap of Goebbels and say that these movements are made up of 91 Jews and Communists. They are made up of every decent and courageous element in the country and they are for the moment the popular expression of the people. I strongly urge His Majesty's Government to consider these principles not only for the sake of the peoples of Europe but for the sake of ourselves. If we throw over the pledges of democracy the very things we are fighting for will become a sham. I beg to move.
LORD STRABOLGIMy Lords, may I be allowed to congratulate my noble friend on bringing forward this very important question and on the very moderate way in which he has expressed the strong feeling on this matter which many people in this country undoubtedly share? When he put down the Motion he was good enough to ask me to say a few words in support of him and to deal very briefly—and I hope carefully—with the situation in Italy. Before I do that may I add this to what my noble friend has so very lucidly said about the situation in the Balkans? I understand that the British military authorities who have been in touch with the actual situation in Greece and Yugoslavia have recognized the state of affairs which the noble Earl has described, and if our own military people had had their way I think we should have avoided a good deal of trouble. Part of the trouble seems to come from a curious organization in Cairo which does not seem altogether to belong to the Foreign Office but which claims to speak and act for the War Cabinet, which in practice, I suppose, means the Prime Minister. Some of its activities seem to Have been questionable. I believe it was responsible for placing the delegates from Greece referred to by the noble Earl under house arrest. Immediately there was a great outcry from more responsible official circles in Cairo and the delegates from the Greek resistance movement were released.
With regard to Italian affairs I want to say at once to my noble friend Lord Snell, who I understand will reply on behalf of the Government, that I am not approaching this matter in any critical spirit. I do not want him to think that I impugn in any way the good faith of His Majesty's Government or our Allies in Italy, or even their good judgment. It is a most difficult and complicated situation there 92 and we all recognize that. I confess I would feel more satisfied if my noble friend Lord Snell were out there in supreme political control of the liberated provinces of Italy and Sicily. But perhaps he can use his good offices in the important position he holds here to influence affairs. In Italy there is the great difficulty that only one-third of the country, approximately, has been liberated from the Nazi tyrants and two-thirds of the country are under the direct military control of the Germans. In the south and in Sicily there seems to be, as in the north of Italy, a strong Republican movement. Your Lordships, I am quite sure, would immediately agree that this is a matter which in the long run ought to be, and must be, settled by the Italian people themselves. Our part in the affair, I imagine, is to give them the opportunity of so settling it along those lines, and indeed we had that stated clearly and I submit, satisfactorily, after the recent Conference between the three Foreign Ministers in Moscow.
An agreed policy was there laid down with regard to Italy which I am sure all your Lordships would entirely support, and it was along the lines of the Motion of my noble friend the Earl of Huntingdon. What I would like to know is whether the Allies in Italy—for we are not alone concerned—are doing their best to implement the political programme for Italy laid down by the Moscow Conference. Again the situation is complicated, as I have just suggested, by the fact that in Naples, broadly speaking, the Americans are supervising affairs, and in the area of which Bari is the administrative centre the British authorities are in control. In Sicily, I understand, Amgot is still in control. I do not on this occasion propose to make any criticism at all concerning the working and administration of Amgot. I understand that in regard to the economic side of its activities, and particularly the distribution of food, the Amgot organization has done very well indeed, while on the political side there are signs that Amgot and those who are responsible for shaping its policy have begun to mend their ways. Therefore, as I say, I am not criticizing Amgot, especially as it seems to have been superseded in the liberated provinces on the mainland of Italy by another organization. But may I draw 93 the attention of my noble friend to the feeling that strategically the Germans have moved much more quickly and resolutely in Italy since the fall of Mussolini and the Fascist regime than we have? We all know—and I am not going into it now—how they recovered from their difficulties and took advantage of their opportunities while we missed our opportunities. We were far slower than they in the strategical field and we will have to pay for it in the future. The danger now is that in the political field the Germans will move or are moving more quickly than we are doing. Let me give an instance In the north there is a puppet Italian administration. Mussolini apparently has phlebitis and is out of the picture.
LORD STRABOLGIYes, phlebitis is a fashionable disease amongst these people Mussolini has heard of what has happened here and has got a doctor's certificate, too. The real governing force in this Italian puppet Government is Marshal Graziani and he has already declared for a Republican Italy, Furthermore, every student of Italian affairs with whom I have been in contact assures me that the great problem in Italy is the land. Lord Addison says that it is a great problem in this country, too. But there is a land hunger in Italy which is different from the land hunger in Britain. The great need of the peasants in Italy is for more land, and these students of Italian economic affairs assure me—and I daresay your Lordships are aware of this also—that this problem can only be satisfactorily settled by the breaking up of the great landed estates. In the north of Italy, so they say, Graziani's puppet Government has already given some 18,000 acres of land to the peasantry, and we may be sure that the German and the Fascist propaganda machines will make the utmost of this fact if it is true. I hear nothing of anything of this sort having been done in the Italian provinces liberated by our armies or in Sicily. It may be going on; I do not know; but that seems to me to point to a danger of the Germans with their Fascist puppets being quicker to appreciate the real political situation in Italy than our people who are ultimately responsible.
94 There is something radically wrong in Italy. What it is I do not pretend to know. We seem to have muddled affairs rather badly; if I may descend, for a moment, to the use of the vulgar tongue, we have "botched" them. Otherwise, how can we account for the fact that the noble Viscount the Leader of the House, Lord Cranborne, speaking from the Government Benches last week, gave as one of the reasons for the setback in the Ægean and in the Dodecanese islands that Italian soldiers had refused to fight? There is obviously something wrong for that to have happened. There was their legal Government and their King calling upon them to eject the Germans and defeat the Nazi menace to civilization and they were not fighting. Yet in Naples, when the Germans were in occupation, the civil population fought with great courage. Schoolboys helped to man the barricades, and even the women fought. The male civilians fought with any weapons that they could lay their hands upon, and it was because of the resistance of the Italian civil population that the Germans were unable to turn Naples into another Sebastopol.
In the north, I understand, the Italian civil population and the soldiers on several occasions have fought with great tenacity against the Germans. If that happened in certain sections of Italy—and I could quote also the episode in Sardinia when the Italian garrison turned on the Germans and forced them to evacuate the island they were holding—why is it that Italian troops in Leros and Cos apparently became non-belligerents as soon as the attack on those islands by the Germans began? There is something wrong. There is lacking some motive to fight, and this is not to be explained only on the ground of general war weariness. In the circumstances I think we are justified in asking the Government for an assurance that, without interfering with the legitimate rights of the Italian people, we are allowing full play to the working of the democratic forces in Italy, such as they are, and doing our best to permit the Italian people themselves to carry out the programme agreed upon by the three Powers at Moscow, and I understand assented to by everyone in your Lordships' House.
§ LORD SNELLMy Lords, the noble Earl, Lord Huntingdon, has raised a matter which is of great interest and, unquestionably also, of great importance. He 95 desires to see democratic Governments elected in every occupied country at the earliest possible moment after their liberation. Let me say at once that that desire is shared not only by all free peoples but also by His Majesty's Government. The policy of His Majesty's Government is at the earliest possible moment to restore sovereign rights and self-government to all those nations who have been outraged by merciless invasion. In doing so they are but following out the third Article of the Atlantic Charter, which reads:
they respect the rights of all peoples to choose the form of government under which they will live; and they wish to see sovereign rights and self-government restored to those who have been forcibly deprived of them.That expresses exactly the wishes and policy of His Majesty's Government. We desire to see that at the earliest possible moment these afflicted nations shall be given the opportunity of exercising the rights which will have been restored to them.The noble Earl said that we should be running into some danger if we attempted to establish puppet Governments. It is not the intention of His Majesty's Government to establish any form of Government; their policy is that the people themselves, as soon as may be, shall declare by free and open election what kind of Government they desire. The first aim of His Majesty's Government is the liberation of these lands from foreign oppression and control. Until that liberation takes place, they believe that the Commander-in-Chief of the Allied Forces must for the time being exercise complete and supreme authority; but, as the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs said in another place, it is not our intention to set up a military Government of any kind in friendly countries, but rather to use to the greatest possible extent the services of officials and other nationals in the respective countries. As soon, therefore, as the military position admits, responsibility for the administration of recovered territories will be transferred to the representatives of the countries concerned—to the national Government, if such exists, or to a national authority—pending the formation of a Government freely chosen by the people themselves.
It is worth while to look for a moment at the difficulty of arranging quickly for such things to take place. It is desirable 96 as far as possible that the normal constitutional practice should be observed, and that the peoples should be given an opportunity of making their wishes known. That is desirable not only for the peoples themselves but also for the Governments. It is right that the people should exercise their recovered rights and feel that they are again a nation; it is right also that the Governments should feel that they have their peoples behind them in their effort. It should be known that the Allied Governments, who have kept the flag flying very bravely through most difficult times, are keenly aware of these facts. There is the time factor to take into account. The moment when free election can take place and when plans for a national Government can be put into operation must of necessity vary. The constitutional processes associated with an election take time to set in motion. Electoral rolls have to be compiled and machinery of registration set up. Preparatory work is already being done by the Allied Governments, but some time must inevitably elapse before they can consult their peoples.
It should also be noted that before all else, before elections and before the choice of this or that Government, the physical life of these peoples must be attended to. It is first of all necessary, as I think Aristotle would have said, that they should live, and then, after life has been provided for them, that their public virtues should be asserted. It would be difficult for elections to take place and for the controversies of an election to go on with starving people all around. Therefore, in my judgment at least, the first thing to do is to see that the peoples are able to live, and then the rest will very quickly follow. These considerations must be taken into account, but at the same time they are not intended to be used as arguments for postponing elections; and so far as His Majesty's Government are con-concerned they will do their best to promote the free expression of a people's will as early as possible. They hope that these liberated peoples may be able to express their wishes with the minimum possible delay.
There are two other considerations to be taken into account; there are the underground movements to which the noble Earl so sympathetically referred, and there is the question of what we mean by democratic Governments. The noble 97 Earl expressed what we all feel—gratitude and reverence for the valour of the Greek population. Once more Greece has risen to heights of human achievement which thrill all who love liberty. At the same time, this subject is not a suitable one at the moment for declarations and debate on the floor of the House. The noble Earl devoted a portion of his speech to these resistance movements, especially in Greece, Yugoslavia and Poland. I am sure that your Lordships will appreciate that it is impossible for me to say what has been done and will be done by way of establishing contact with these movements and supplying them with arms. Such matters have an operational significance, so that any information I gave would be of value to the enemy, and would prejudice the future success of these movements and imperil the lives of their members.
I can only repeat that we are doing our best to support those loyal elements on the Continent who are resisting their Nazi oppressors, and we are encouraging them to unite together in their struggle against the common foe in order that effective action can be taken at the appropriate time. I assure your Lordships that the Government are not blind to the contribution which these resistance movements are making to the common cause, and regard as valued allies all those who are willing to co-operate with us. Lord Strabolgi spoke of the difficulties in regard to Italy, and used words which confirm the principles that I am trying to state on behalf of His Majesty's Government— namely, that the difficulties must be settled by the Italian people themselves mainly. There is no country for which public men of my generation have a greater affection than that of Italy, and we shall all hope that these difficulties will pass; but in the meantime we have to remember that it is a changing scene from day to cay, and it is almost inconceivable that you could set up a particular form of Government there at the present time. All the same, may I say that his criticisms and suggestions will be studied by the Government in the proper Department?
Then I would like to say a word about what we mean by the democratic election of Governments. The desire of His Majesty's Government is that Governments should be established which are truly representative of the people's wishes, but His Majesty's Government have no inten- 98 tion of dictating the actual form which those Governments should take. The noble Earl, Lord Huntingdon, made the criticism that it has not been the democracies which we have supported. Not long ago my noble friend Lord Rankeillour started a debate in which he expressed the fear that we had given the impression abroad that we favoured the establishment of Left Wing Governments. If Lord Rankeillour had been present to-day I should have left the matter to be fought out between Lord Huntingdon and himself, but, as he is not, I again repeat what the Leader of the House said on that occasion, that our attitude was strictly impartial, and that we favoured the policy of an unfettered choice as to the form of Government to be established. That, after all, is what we are fighting for—the right of every people to run their own lives in their own way.
We may hope that the choice they will make may be the choice of democracy, but the choice must be left to them. Some countries may prefer a more or less completely democratic Government, such as our own; others may wish for modifications or extensions. The choice is for them, and not for us. Our business is to secure as early as may be their opportunity to express their own wishes. We must also remember that there are difficulties in defining with exactitude what democracy means, and also the precise degree of public control which entitles a country to be called democratic. For example, one country might assent to certain checks and vetoes and a system of control which other nations might reject. The essential thing is that the people should have the free choice, and that in the main constitutes democracy. Any system of Government which gives the people ultimate control is in my belief democracy. That and nothing else is democracy, and this control by the people may be secured through different machinery in different countries. The noble Earl has with moderation and usefulness drawn our attention to this important matter, and I hope that what I have said may have given him a reasonable measure of satisfaction.
THE EARL OF PERTHMy Lords, I listened with great appreciation to the speech which has just been made by the noble Lord, and I was very glad to note that in his concluding sentences he said that democracy means that the people 99 must have the ultimate control. I was very happy to note that, because in some previous parts of his speech I was not quite sure whether he was not going rather far. He quoted the third point of the Atlantic Charter, which states that the signatories "respect the right of all peoples to choose the form of government under which they will live"; but I think he omitted to make mention of a very important point. Point 6 of the Atlantic Charter states that Nazi tyranny must be destroyed. Therefore, while the Atlantic Charter respects the rights of all people to choose their form of government, there is one reservation—namely, that they must not choose a Government based on Fascist or Nazi principles. I think we can derive that assumption quite well from the sixth point of the Charter and if the noble Lord agrees with me what I have said is superfluous. I hope he does.
§ THE EARL OF HUNTINGDONMy Lords, I should like to say how much I appreciate—and I think noble Lords on these Benches will bear me out—the reply of the noble Lord, Lord Snell, to this Motion, and I wonder if we can assume also the implications which lie behind his statement. If it is really the Government's intention—which I profoundly welcome—that the peoples shall have the choice of their Governments, and that ultimate control shall be vested in the people themselves, in that case all the 100 Governments in exile—whether Yugoslav, or Greek, or any other—are, as it were, trustees, and when we liberate those countries these Governments will have to wait as trustees until popular choice has decided whether they want them back or not. If that implication of Lord Snell's speech is correct I think we have moved a great step forward to-day and we can realize that the Government really do mean to see established popular control in Europe. I should also like to associate myself with the noble Earl who has just spoken in that we obviously do not wish to see Fascist Governments, but I personally think that any country that has been under Fascist control will certainly never choose to have a Fascist or Nazi Government again. I beg leave to withdraw my Motion.
§ Motion for Papers, by leave, withdrawn.