THE TABLET, June 30th, 1956. VOL. 207, No. 6058

THE TABLET

Published as a Newspaper

A WEEKLY NEWSPAPER & REVIEW

Pro Ecclesia Dei, Pro Regina et Patria

FOUNDED IN 1840

JUNE 30th, 1956

NINEPENCE

Socialists Think Again: The Neglect o f Liberty

Towards the African Future: The Capricorn Convention at Salima

Scotland and Bavaria: A Monastic Link. By Mark Dilworth, O.S.B.

Journey into Orthodoxy: The Progress of Wyndham Lewis. By John Coulson

“ The Perfect Flowering” : On Devotion to the Sacred Heart. By Mgr. R. A. Knox

Critics’ Columns : Notebook : Book Reviews : Letters : Chess

COMMONWEALTH FUTURES T HE Colonial Secretary has very aptly summed up British Colonial policy ; it is “to make nations.” But then we have to be a little clearer what we mean by a nation. The idea is elastic, not necessarily the same as a State, and for many of our colonial territories the burden of trying to be a sovereign State would be plainly excessive. Nations inside the Commonwealth ought to be countries organized in a certain fashion, to reflect an idea common to them all of what constitutes a good State. This means in practice a forbearance on the part of electoral majorities to press the theory of majority rule too hard. It involves a readiness to remain open societies, to be liberal in trade, receptive of interchange in the educational and cultural fields, tolerant towards religious confessions.

aligned with that of the United States than with that of India, although India is in the Commonwealth. But the divergence was greater two years ago. The changes in Russia make a common Commonwealth policy more possible, although there is still a great gap between Indian neutralism and the more wary readiness of the Commonwealth generally to believe that the time has come to think more about economic rivalry than military preparedness.

The current meeting of Commonwealth Prime Ministers, taking stock of what they have in common, can no longer use the language that was easy and natural thirty years ago, about a common allegiance to the Crown. For several Commonwealth countries the Crown is overcharged with past associations of dependence. They do not see it as a symbol of union and equality, but as a survival from the days when they were governed from London. And we have to recognize that when countries proclaim themselves Republics, that is not in itself an act of cleavage, nor one that reflects a desire for greater separation. It is a reflection of an internal psychological necessity, to assert equality in the face of the outside world ; to reassure themselves that they really are sovereign States. Once that has been done and accepted, the political relationship becomes easier, and not more difficult, provided the common interest is there. What will reduce the Commonwealth to unreality, its language to a boring fiction, and a trying one for other members of the United Nations, will be the pursuit by the different members of distinct and perhaps contradictory foreign policies. The real business of the London meeting is with Mr. Nehru, to see how far there can be a common policy towards Russia. It is regrettable that President Eisenhower’s precarious health has caused Mr. Nehru to postpone the visit to Washington next month. At present, as for some time past, the policy of Great Britain has been much more closely

Mr. Bandaranaike, whose general international outlook is extremely similar to Mr. Nehru’s, arrives in London not to concert any common policy for even the minimum of contingent defence, but to secure a date by which Great Britain will relinquish the bases in Ceylon. We are rapidly approaching a position where, as far as defence goes, Great Britain, the United States, Australia and New Zealand plan and work together. Pakistan stands with them. But India and Ceylon not only take no part but profess to regard the whole policy as mistaken ; at best unnecessary, at worst provocatively dangerous. That is a line of criticism to which the countries who still think defence necessary can reply that Indian, and now Sinhalese, policy is parasitic ; that it is because there is a counterpoise in Asia to their own power that the Chinese Communists are not expanding dynamically on to and over the borders of India.

The charms of the role of enlightened neutralism are only possible to Mr. Nehru because other statesmen and other countries have shouldered the costly and vexatious business of meeting force with force. We are glad Mr. Nehru has coincided in London with ex-President Truman, a most honoured visitor here, because he thrice took resolute decisions which checked Communist expansion, in Berlin, Greece and Korea. Mr. Nehru and Mr. Bandaranaike, claiming the easy role for themselves and their countries, should have the grace to recognize that they would sleep much less securely if the only force in Asia was that in Communist hands, able to subvert State after State, and to instal a Communist minority, as the shadow of the Red Army was sufficient to do in the neighbouring countries of Eastern Europe.

The problem of representative government in countries