MARGINAL COMMENT
By HAROLD NICOLSON
LORD WINTERTON, in a letter to the • Daily Telegraph on Monday, defended the handling by the Home Office of last week's debate upon the refugee problem. Relying upon his experi- ence as chairman of the Inter-Governmental Refugees Committee, Lord Winterton complained that those who, in the House of Com- mons and elsewhere, badger the Front Bench regarding the treatment of these miserable outcasts, " show no appreciation of the difficulties of the probletn " ; and he implied that, in their desire to obtain " cheap cheers," these enthusiasts introduced into the controversy an element of emotionalism which bore little relation to the actual facts. I do not feel that this describes quite fairly the dissatisfaction left in the minds of many Members by the course of the debate. It had been expected that Mr. Osbert Peake, fresh from his labours at the Bermuda Conference, would be in a position to indicate the decisions which had been taken by His Majesty's Government and the Government of the United States. He did, it is true, suggest that certain useful articles of agreement, and alleviation had been reached. Yet he implied that the more important decisions which had been come to could not be divulged for reasons of " security." Nor did he convince his audience that the Home Office approached, this problem in any spirit of enthusiasm ; the angry little taps which he dealt to his manuscript indicated displeasure rather than sympathy. And the impression was conveyed that the Home Office regard all those who interest themselves in the victims of Nazi tyranny as nuisances, sentimentalists, cranks and bores. Mr. Eden, it is true, made it plain that he at least realised that we were discussing a profound human tragedy ; Mr, Peake approached the matter as if he were dealing with foot-and-mouth disease.
* * I have a sincere respect for Mr. Herbert Morrison. I regard him as a man of strength, resource, energy and delightful humour ; but I have a horrible suspicion that he does not regard foreigners as members of the human race. The Home Office do not seem to realise that our authority in Europe and the world is based not so much upon power as upon the confidence and respect inspired by our national conduct. Never in our rough island story has our repute, and therefore our responsibility,- been either. so wide or deep as today ; yet the Home Office do not always seem to understand that this repute is based upon our generosity as well as upon our courage. It would be unfair to reproach the Home Office for the drastic measures which were taken during the dreadful weeks of 1940. They were not solely, or even primarily, to blame. Invasion seemed imminent, and our margin of safety was so frail that we could not risk the presence of a fifth column in our midst. Urgent measures against refugees of enemy origin had to be taken within a few hours ; much con- fusion, grave hardship, frequent injustice, and (in a few instances) actual cruelty, resulted. The fact remains that the mass internment of refugees in 1940 did leave a stain upon our reputation for decency and calm. If we are to remove that stain we should, now that we have reached safer waters, display an energy of sympathy, and prove that our ancient tradition of asylum is not wholly dead. Is it un- patriotic to desire that our own country, in matters of human suffering, should behave more generously than any other country? Does it display any desire to embarrass the Government to urge that they should treat this problem, not as a mere detail of depart- mental routine, but as a moral issue affecting our international repute?, The Home Secretary must know that those who press him in this matter are not seeking to cause him personal incon- venience, or to attract public attention to themselves. The repre- sentations which have been made to him privately have been ac- corded the scantiest courtesy ; it is his own fault if the matter has been dragged into the arena of public controversy.
* * * * The relations between a Miniiter and a back-bencher are governed by certain polite conventions. The back-bencher, however well he may be provided with ammunition, however excellent his corn-
munications may be, has to advance across the open against pre- pared positions. The Government bench is strongly fortified ; it possesses vast earth-works of official information,- and if these are pierced a retirement in good order may be made into the Maginot Line of "security," and " the public • interest." It is not within the usual convention that a Minister, when faced with sincere criticism, should seek to score points by sniping. There was no reason why Mr. Peake should have dragged in the Bishop of Chichester, and accused him of making no constructive suggestions. The Bishop had, in fact, made a most "constructive suggestion. He had suggested that Germany should be asked to release for asylum in other countries a certain number of Jews from Germany and occupied territory. It may well be that the German Government will reject such a suggestion, or even leave it unanswered ; but the, idea is worth carrying out. Miss Rathbone, again—whose cam- paign on behalf of the refugees has been courageous and intense —had urged that a special commissioner, " a new Nansen," should be empowered to centralise relief ; Mr. Peake swept aside this sug- gestion, and concentrated upon the wholly incidental point that the son of one of the families which Miss Rathbone had cited was Krupps' agent at Instanbul. It may be a terrible thing to be the agent of an armament firm ; it may alienate all sympathy from the parents for their boy to be Krupps' agent in Turkey ; but all this has nothing whatsoever to do with the central point, namely, that something more should be done to provide asylum for those who are facing massacre and starvation. If we wait only for victory, then there will be but few to save.
* * * * •
It is a fact that since 1933 we in this country have been able to welcome, harbour and maintain a large number of refugees who, but for us, would be either dead or languishing at Dachau or Buchenwald. It is a fact that our Government have taken a leading part in urging and assisting other Governments to display equal receptivity. Those who espouse the cause of the victims of Nazi tyranny are fully aware that even in the best of circumstances only a tiny proportion of victims could be rescued, and that transport and other difficulties preclude all hope of any mass evacuation. And in fairness to the Home Office it must be admitted that their chilly attitude is due, less to any lack of human sympathy, than to a reputable desire to make no promises which they know they will be unable to. fulfill. Yet even when one makes all these reserva- tions, and all these allowances, it is difficult to believe that our Home Office approach the problem with that burning sympathy by which alone the difficulties and obstructions can be surmounted. Nor am I convinced, even by Lord Winterton, that -the remedies suggested by the National Committee for Rescue from Nazi Terror are either impracticable or beside the point. Some of them may in truth not be feasible ; but others might be at least attempted.
* * * * I see, for instance, no overwhelming reason why we should not offerto exchange for Jewish children some of the pro-Nazi or pro- Fascist civilians now in internment in this country or elsewhere. I see no reason why, with the vast areas now at our disposal, tem- porary refugee camps should not be organised pending dispersal else- where. I see no reason why we should not go further than we have gone already in urging and assisting other Governments to accept refugees. And, above all, I see no reason why the United Nations should not 'appoint a Refugee Commissioner of the calibre of Dr. Nansen, to concentrate the whole negotiations in his hands. Dr. Nansen, at the end of the last war, saved many millions of lives; by per- sonal contact, persuasion and pressure he was able within a few weeks to accomplish far more than could ever be accomplished through the ordinary diplomatic channels ; and, above all, he was able to inspire the oppressed with the conviction that the victorious nations were not indifferent to their sufferings, and that Europe had not averted her eyes in impotent lethargy. His problems, it is true, were less terrible than ours today ; but if he saved his missions, why could not a new Nansen rescue thousands today?
Previous page
