§ LORD ADDISONMy Lords, may I ask the Leader of the House whether the Government have any statement to make on the Moscow Conference?
THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR DOMINION AFFAIRS (VISCOUNT CRANBORNE) (Lord Cecil)My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Addison, for the opportunity he has given me to say a few words this afternoon with regard to the Moscow Conference. I take it that he is putting his question in no critical spirit; indeed, I think it would be difficult to find matter for criticism with regard to a meeting so outstandingly successful in its character and so entirely harmonious throughout the whole of its proceedings. No doubt the noble Lord's aim—and it is, of course, a very proper 688 aim—is to enable the House to express its whole-hearted approval of what has been achieved, and to voice the thanks of noble Lords to my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary, who has played so prominent a part in this historic meeting.
There is not a great deal that I can add to the very full declaration which was issued at the end of the Conference, but I have been in touch with my right honourable friend since his return to this country yesterday, and I can give the House some additional information to what has already been issued in the Press. As my right honourable friend has already explained in another place to-day, the outstanding feature, to him, of the Conference was the friendly atmosphere of mutual trust and confidence in which the conversations took place. Whether at the Council table or in the informal talks which he had with Marshal Stalin, M. Molotov, Mr. Hull, and Mr. Harriman, there was the same warmth and cordiality evident, and this sense of confidence grew as the meetings proceeded. I think it was this harmony of outlook which, above all else, made possible the striking results which we are recording this afternoon. My right honourable friend paid a glowing tribute both to M. Molotov for his patience, skill, and judgment and to Mr. Hull, whose single-mindedness and sincerity of purpose were, my right honourable friend said, an inspiration to all at the meetings.
Now I should like to turn briefly to the work of the Conference itself. It was agreed to start the talks with a discussion of measures for shortening the duration of the war in Europe. While it is clearly not possible for me to give any account of the conclusions that were reached beyond the carefully-chosen words of the communiqué itself—for to do so would obviously be to give valuable information to the enemy—it is possible to tell the House that no part of the discussions did more good to the mutual relations between the three Powers than the frank and exhaustive examination which was made of this most important of all subjects. There was no tendency on the part of any of the delegates to evade any of the difficult and important issues which were thus raised. For obvious reasons, your Lordships will not expect me, I know, to say more on this aspect of the Conference, and I shall therefore pass to the published decisions.
689 First of all, let me say a word about the declaration of the four nations on general security, of which Mr. Hull was the parent. The principles agreed in this declaration constitute, perhaps, the most far-reaching of all the decisions that were reached, and provide enduring evidence of Mr. Hull's sagacity and statesmanship. They cover the whole future organization of world security. For that reason the House will, I know, wish to express its satisfaction that the Government of China could associate itself with the other three Powers in approving this document, and was able to become an original signatory of it. The significance of the declaration briefly is this. As within nations, so between nations, the unity won in war in pursuit of a common victory is hard to hold when the victory is won. The importance of the Four-Power Declaration, therefore, lies in the emphasis it lays on the decision of the four great Allies to continue their co-operation after the war. This applies not only to the measures required immediately after the enemy's defeat, but also to the long-term organization of security.
Equally useful talks took place on future economic measures of co-operation. After security, my Lords, clearly this is the next most important field in which the lot of man can be improved, and the House will be glad to know that all the three Foreign Ministers found themselves in general agreement on the programme for handling these vast problems on many of which much work, as your Lordships know, has already been done. But as my right honourable friend emphasized, the Four-Nation Declaration is not enough by itself. It is absolutely essential that there should be special machinery, over and above the ordinary diplomatic machinery, through which this country and its great Allies can work continuously together and concert rapidly and efficiently their views on the many political problems arising out of the war. The experience of this war has shown the urgent need for some such special machinery, but the geographical and other difficulties have been formidable. It was a great, and perhaps on a long view the greatest, achievement of the Conference to take the first steps in establishing this machinery.
The immediate and most pressing need was clearly for some body to act as a clearing house for the exchange of in- 690 formation and ideas between the three Governments upon certain European questions arising out of the war. For this purpose the Conference decided to set up as soon as possible, in London, a European Advisory Commission composed of responsible representatives of this country, of the United States of America, and of the Soviet Union. This Commission will, as its name implies, be of an advisory character and it will be set up forthwith. It will be its duty to study and to make joint recommendations to the three Governments upon questions which the three Governments agree to refer to it. We shall be able to keep in step at every stage and so avoid the delays and misunderstandings which would inevitably occur if we were each to make our plans separately. The House will, I am sure, understand the practical reasons why it was desirable to limit the initial membership of this Advisory Commission to the three Powers. It is, however, right that I should emphasize once more that it is an advisory and not an executive body. It is a piece of machinery set up for the convenience of the three Governments themselves, and not as an instrument for imposing their views upon others.
It is designed to concert the political planning of the three Powers. Upon these obviously must lie the major responsibility for winning the war in Europe and for ensuring that it is followed by a lasting peace. The setting up of this body in London does not of course preclude other methods of consultation between the three Governments. Indeed, the Conference also agred that it would sometimes be more convenient in dealing with certain questions to hold special tripartite consultations in Washington or Moscow or London between the Foreign Secretary concerned and the Ambassadors of the other two Powers. It is hoped thus to establish the habit—a very valuable habit —of Three-Power discussions in all three capitals and this should provide a useful addition to the existing mechanism.
At the same time the Conference decided to set up an Inter-Allied Advisory Council for matters relating to Italy. This body is quite independent of the European Advisory Commission and has a specific task to perform. Its duty will be to deal with day-to-day problems other than questions of military operations and to make agreed recommendations for the purpose of co-ordinating Allied policy 691 with regard to Italy. It will be set up at once, with representatives of this country, the United States, the Soviet Union and the French Committee of National Liberation. But provision is also being made for representatives of Greece and Yugoslavia to be added as full members as soon as practicable. Those two countries clearly have a special interest in Italian affairs as a consequence of the aggressions of Fascist Italy upon their national territory during this war. It is the belief of my right honourable friend that this Italian Council will be of real service in ensuring and maintaining a common policy in regard to Italy. Occasion was also taken at the Conference to give the Soviet Government an account of the history of Allied military government in Italy, a subject which has been many times under discussion in your Lordships' House, and the principles on which it was based. In the light of this and of exchanges of view with the Soviet Delegation, it was not difficult to reach agreement on the declaration regarding policy in Italy which has now been published. This declaration is also in itself an important contribution to understanding between our three countries.
So much for the machinery set up by the Conference. It has an essential task to perform and if it is successful, and in my right honourable friend's view it will be successful, it will make a substantial contribution towards winning both the war and the peace that follows the war. As regards the rest of the talks I think it will be sufficient to say that there was no major political question regarding Europe that was not the subject of discussion in some form or other. If complete identity of view did not prevail on all questions—and indeed that would have been impossible—at any rate a basis of good will was established and that is the main prerequisite to the solution of international as of other problems.
That, my Lords, briefly, is the record of this great Conference. The results achieved, it will be agreed, are in themselves remarkable. But the meeting, the discussions and the happy and harmonious conclusions had another effect, which I think was equally important in its immediate impact upon events. It has given the lie once and for all to the enemy's suggestion that there is dissension between 692 the Allies. On that, German propaganda was obviously banking and rashly it made no secret of its hopes. The disappointment and the disillusionment of the German people will therefore be proportionately greater. The importance of this aspect, I think, is likely to increase as the months pass and the shadows gather ever darker about the Nazi régime, and those shadows will certainly not be lightened by the stern warning which was given by the leaders of the three Powers as to the fate awaiting those guilty of abominable cruelties in the countries overrun by German forces. On his way home, as your Lordships know, my right honourable friend took the opportunity of meeting the Turkish Minister of Foreign Affairs and had with him frank and cordial talks which covered a wide field, as is natural after so important an event as the Moscow Conference.
That, briefly, is the story of my right honourable friend's journey. It seems likely to mark one of the main milestones in this great struggle, and I feel sure your Lordships will wish me to express your heartfelt thanks to my right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary for the services he has rendered to the country at this most successful meeting. He stands very high in the honourable line of British Foreign Secretaries. Though comparatively young in years as politics go, he is an elder statesman in experience and he knows the international scene as perhaps no one else in this country knows it to-day. His great talents have, I am sure, never shown to greater advantage than at Moscow. Had that Conference not reached agreement it would have been, to put it mildly, a serious set-back to the Allied cause. As events have turned out, it has taken us a long step towards victory. It has inflicted bitter disappointment upon our enemies. In the words of the National Anthem, it has confounded their politics, frustrated their knavish tricks. It has done more. By demonstrating a complete understanding between the United States, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and ourselves and by the Four-Power Pact signed there, it has laid, one may hope, a strong, stable foundation for the future peace, prosperity and happiness of the world.
§ LORD ADDISONMy Lords, I am sure we are fortunate in that as the result of the wonderful invention of the aeroplane the Foreign Secretary was able to 693 return to this country before the adjournment of your Lordships' House, and I am sure we are glad, too, that an opportunity has been afforded for making the statement to which we have just listened. We are grateful, too, to the noble Viscount for, I am afraid, taking some risk with his own personal health in corning here so soon. He knows that we appreciate it. I am glad that he paid the deserved tribute to the Foreign Secretary that he did, and I believe there is not a man of any Party who will not most heartily join in it. As he said, the Foreign Secretary has got a large share of his life before him, compared with many of us, and we can count ourselves very fortunate indeed in having a man in the prime of life with so ripe an experience, so calm a judgment, coupled with vision and industry which have enabled him to guide things as he has done in this country and to participate in the achievement of what I think history will come to regard as one of the most important agreements of all time. I believe that results, apart from our immediate feeling of gratitude, will be the greatest tribute to the Foreign Secretary's achievement.
It is scarcely possible that at this short notice a detailed discussion of this great matter should take place, but I have no doubt opportunities will arise for discussing it in whole or in part, because it is a very big thing indeed. As the noble Viscount the Leader of the House said, the biggest and most outstanding thing was the remarkable evidence of cordiality, frankness and good understanding that prevailed in Moscow from the very beginning. I feel sure that as time passes one of the greatest things that will mark the Conference will be the accord which it has established in terms of realities between the Soviet Union and the English-speaking nations. That in itself is a thing so big that one almost hesitates to contemplate the possibilities of benefaction that may arise from it if it is continued, as I am sure it will continue. It means the overcoming, no doubt on both sides, of many prejudices and many long-entertained misgivings, the one of the other. We owe a great deal to Mr. Eden as well as to the boldness of the Prime Minister for helping to overcome that, because there is not a question that keeping the peace and ensuring the security of the peace of the world must depend upon the frank co- 694 operation of that great State in Europe and Asia and the American and British people. This is a wonderful and gratifying step. I have no doubt that the machinery which has been set up will help to ensure that progress is made, and I am sure we should all like to associate ourselves with what the noble Viscount the Leader of the House said in paying tribute to that heroic man Mr. Hull, for his long journey to and fro, and for the high spirit and clear guidance that he must have provided on many occasions in Moscow. We also owe a great deal to M. Molotov and to that stern, frank realist, Marshal Stalin, for seeing that the Conference got down to business and did big things quickly without much circumlocution.
There are one or two questions which occur to one. I feel that the method of approach to what I describe as the creation of an organization for the maintenance of peace and security in the future is the right method of approach. It means that it begins by practical co-operation of the chief nations engaged in the war who are confronted with the realities and the difficulties that must attend practical co-operation either in the military field in war or in the security of peace thereafter. I am sure it is the right way to begin, and I hope that one or other of the Tripartite Conferences to which the noble Viscount referred will offer opportunity for promoting as soon as practicable what is described as the general international organization for the maintenance of international peace and security. It will, I think, inevitably grow out of the association during the war which will lay its foundation, and the fact that China is associated with it is, of course, of great importance. My noble friend on my left (Viscount Cecil of Chelwood) may perhaps say a little on this subject, and no one is more highly qualified to do so, so that I leave it there.
I was glad, too, that the European Advisory Commission, or the London Commission, as I think it is called, was linked in the first place to the three Powers that are actively co-operating in the war. There must be a great variety of subjects for which rapidity of decision is vital, and the more discussion is confined to those immediately concerned in the operations the more likely we shall be to avoid delay. At the same time one welcomes the 695 co-operation of the French National Committee and, ultimately, of Greece and Yugoslavia on the Italian Advisory Council. I assume that these things taken together mean that what has hitherto been known as Amgot will cease to function. I was never one who criticized Amgot in any unfriendly spirit. It seemed to me that those on the spot had to do the best they could with the material that was there, and, on the whole, I think, they did very well.
I was particularly glad—and I am sure every Britisher was, for I have heard this matter commented upon frequently outside—that in the course of this declaration regarding war criminals there was a statement to the effect that they would be pursued, if necessary, to the uttermost ends of the earth. I hope that that will be made good, and that the bolt-holes that are evidently being diligently prepared by some of these rascals will be blocked up. There are few things on which people feel more strongly than that the pledges to deal adequately with war criminals shall be made good and that something quite different shall happen this time, in that respect, to what we saw after the last war. One says this in no spiteful or vengeful spirit. It is the only way of demonstrating our determination to put down wickedness of this kind and to see that wrongdoers are punished—that they are brought to justice and dealt with. There are plenty of them about.
So I am glad that these three great nations have made this declaration. I notice too that the Four-Power Declaration includes—though I do not think the noble Viscount the Leader of the House mentioned it—a declaration that every effort will be made to promote general agreement amongst the United Nations for the regulation of armaments in the post-war period. That also was a very important provision in the Moscow Agreement. How that will be effected and how it will be dealt with in the creation of future organizations remains to be seen, but I am quite sure that all the valuable lessons— and there were ever so many of them— that were learnt at Geneva will not be ignored, and that we may be certain that our experiences, unfortunate and fortunate, will be fully made use of. Most gratifying of all, I think, is the fact that not only 696 is the United States a party to this great agreement, but the United States Senate, even since it was signed, has emphasized its adherence to these principles and its willingness to give them practical effect. I think there is no doubt at all that the future maintenance of peace, without which no economic progress is possible, depends, and must depend, upon the hearty co-operation of these three great States principally, and this agreement does give a practical assurance that in that matter humanity will not be disappointed. It is for this very great thing that we feel grateful to-day.
§ LORD MOTTISTONEMy Lords, only a word is necessary from this quarter of the House. That is to say that we rejoice with all other noble Lords present in the success of the Moscow Conference, and we do most cordially join with my noble friend Lord Addison in congratulating Mr. Eden on the success, the striking success, of his efforts on our behalf at Moscow. We extend to Mr. Eden also our congratulations on his safe return to the country whose interests he has served so well
§ VISCOUNT CECIL OF CHELWOODMy Lords, I trust that your Lordships will bear with me if I venture to add a few words—and they shall be as few as I can make them—to what has been said. Let me begin by saying that I desire to associate myself most heartily and completely with all that has been said by the Leader of the House, and by the two other noble Lords who have addressed your Lordships, in congratulating my right honourable friend Mr. Eden, for the admirable way in which he has conducted this, as so much else during the war of a diplomatic character. He has the great advantage of being not only a first-rate Foreign Secretary but also of being— what does not always go with that—a first-rate diplomatist. In this case he had the opportunity to show how pre-eminently qualified he was in both capacities.
I wish to ask one question which, though it is not very directly raised by this discussion, is indirectly raised. That question is in reference to the agreement which I understand from the newspapers has been signed and which is commonly described as U.N.R.R.A. I do not want to discuss it at all on this occasion, but I hope that my noble friend the Leader of the House will feel it possible to lay that agreement, 697 now that it has actually been signed, on the Table of the House, for it is a matter of great importance that we should not— and I hope that we shall not—in the hurry and anxieties of war, do anything to diminish the privileges of Parliament to be properly informed about all matters of first-rate importance. I do not know whether we can be told immediately about the possibility of that agreement being placed on the Table or not.
There fell from the lips of my noble friend Lord Addison at the end of his observations, a reference to war criminals. That is a matter which I hope we shall have an opportunity of discussing, but I do not think it would be suitable for me to raise any question about it on the present occasion. My noble friend the Leader of the House gave us a very useful and interesting statement as to the exact functions of the European Commission and the Commission on Italian Affairs. I do not wish to discuss either one or the other at the present time, but there is one aspect of them which I am not quite sure that I understand at this moment. I understand that these are two Commissions to be set up now, and we are also told that as soon as practicable a larger organization is to be created. I do not know whether it is possible for some information to be given us as to what will be the relations between these two bodies. I do not ask for a reply now, but I hope that the Government will consider that question, because after the last war a good deal of difficulty, as I can testify from personal experience, was raised by the existence of what was called the Ambassadors' Conference side by side with the League of Nations. One never knew under which jurisdiction a question came. I hope, therefore, that that will be carefully considered.
I want to say a few words on the main Moscow Agreement. I do not desire to conceal that I was particularly interested in the paragraph which deals with the establishment at the earliest practicable date of a general international organization. That by itself was a very important decision; that these four great countries— I was very glad to hear my noble friend emphasize the agreement of China with this part of the decisions—have agreed on the broad, general principle that there must be a general international organization. They went on to make two additions 698 to it, that it should be based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all peace-loving States—a very important decision, in view of various discussions which have taken place—and upon membership by all such States, which, also, was a very important decision. Finally, they agreed that it should be for the maintenance of international peace and security. I can only say very respectfully that I cannot conceive any clearer or more statesmanlike formula in which to embody what I believe to be the only possible successful principles of international organization for peace, and therefore I welcome that with the greatest possible warmth. It is a step forward of enormous importance. Here is a great principle laid down by the three States represented at Moscow, joined by China. The agreement of those four Sates means tremendous power and authority, and it was increased by the fact that the moment the Senate of the United States heard of it they decided to put a clause into the resolution which they were considering warmly approving of what had been done.
There is one other thing which I want to say about it. It is a step forward, but, of course, only a step. If any such organization is to succeed ultimately— and if it does not succeed, there really seems very little hope for the world—it must be based finally on popular support. I think that it is very important to insist on that. On the present occasion I do not want to go back into past history more than necessary, but the previous attempt at an international organization broke down, as far as it did break down, very largely because the peoples did not really appreciate what they were in for when they made the agreement. It was unfortunate; perhaps it was not anybody's fault. It is of the utmost importance that we should not make a similar mistake again. For heaven's sake let us tell the people what all this means, so that they may gradually begin to realize it and make up their minds whether they are prepared to go through with it. The issues are so tremendous that I hope your Lordships will forgive me if I venture to raise them at the first opportunity after the signature of this agreement. If we can get popular support for this, if it can be really accepted ex animo by the peoples of the world, then it seems to me to open a vista of the 699 greatest possible encouragement for the future of the world. Anything is better than half-hearted support; unless the support is whole-hearted, genuine and fundamental, this organization will not work when it gets into difficulties in the future. I do very earnestly appeal to the Government, therefore, to do everything they can to help to educate the people of this country, and consequently the people of the world, as to what this great attempt really means.
It is perfectly true that nothing can actually be done until the victory has been achieved, and it is equally true that that victory will be early or late according to the amount of energy and vigour which all of the Allied belligerents put into the war effort; but I may be permitted, perhaps, to doubt whether that energy will be increased to the utmost extent by drawing gloomy pictures of what may possibly be before us and by emphasizing the difficulties and dangers which no doubt threaten every country which is at war, until peace is again made. I doubt whether that is really the way to get the best effort out of English people. I do not speak of other sections of the British community, but I hope I know something of my own fellow-countrymen. I do not believe that it is any use trying to frighten them into exertion. I remember a story of the late Lord Roberts, who carried on propaganda for conscription. It failed. To someone who spoke to him about it afterwards, he replied "The great difficulty is that you cannot frighten the English." I believe that to be partly a merit, and perhaps partly a defect, but it seems to me to be profoundly true.
You will not frighten the English into making a great effort, but if you tell them that here is a really splendid result which can be achieved and that every day the war goes on that result is to some extent imperilled, or at any rate the great mass of human misery is increased, and if you ask them to do their utmost now not only to win but win at the earliest possible moment, then I believe such an appeal, made with the tremendous force with which it can be made by our leaders at the present time, would meet with an immediate and most gratifying response. For that reason, and also because I do very warmly and heartily welcome what has been said already, and 700 because I believe that it is only by securing the support of the people that that result can be definitely secured, I ask the Government to take the people into their confidence as soon as they can and as completely as they can and tell them exactly what their policy is in every detail. I believe that by doing so they will ensure an admirable result.
VISCOUNT CRANBORNEMy Lords, I do not propose to say anything more to your Lordships, because, strictly speaking, this statement was made upon a question, and we have stretched our procedure a little wide already in the matter of supplementary discussion, but obviously this is an occasion when it was right and proper to do so, and your Lordships' House always takes a sensible view of such matters. I have been asked two questions by the noble Viscount. The first concerned the relationship of the European Council to the wider organization which will be set up later. He will not, I am sure, expect me to answer that to-day. I can only say that I am certain that my right honourable friend has very much in mind the considerations which he has mentioned. The other question was of a more definite character—whether His Majesty's Government will lay the U.N.R.R.A. Agreement before Parliament. I am glad to give him the assurance that they will do so at the earliest practicable moment.