Sir: British diplomacy since 1938 has rested on the belief
that countries with whom we have obligations both by treaty and by friendship should feel grateful when they are abandoned by so superior a partner. Denis Hills is far too nice to pull the rug from under Ivor Porter (Books 3 June) and his boy scout war. The truth is that Britain and France never had any intention of guaranteeing the borders of Poland or Rumania: the gesture was senile diploma- tic funk, made ridiculous both by our lack of military power and our understanding of what these countries actually were, since Poland had burst into independence in 1919 with enormous undefined areas of White Russian and Ukrainian territory, while Rumania had doubled in size to absorb tens of thousands of Hungarians and Germans in Transylvania.
To lament the 'brutal reduction' of Rumania in 1940 is weeping to the audi- ence, but to suggest that Britain had any positive role in King Michael's surrender to Russia is to constitute oneself as the audience. The king hardly had a decision to make since the Germans were on the run and the Russians ad portas. He may, however, have been misled by the intrepid SOE agent that Britain would be of some help later to keep the Russians from outright subversion of Rumania.
But it is not British diplomacy to help friends when they are down, especially when they have previously been promised worthless 'guarantees'. It may be a small comfort that Hong Kong's delivery to China will end the miserable record of deceit since Prague, for we will have no one left to betray.
Michael Coultas
2 Blenheim Crescent, London W11
Previous page
