Ext 6116/46(S) 'Secret Weekly Political Intelligence Summaries, nos 356-416, August 1946-November 1947' [‎152v] (308/978)

mmm
system the Social Democrats favoured the
Foreign Minister could hardly fail to be-
aware of the fact that the dividing-line lay
between States upholding the principles of
justice and the freedom of the individual,
on the one hand, and those where despotism
and oppression ruled on the other.
The criticisms of Svenska Dagbladet
seem to be very much to the point and they
have, therefore, been reported at some
length, but this does not mean that
M. Unden’s speech did not receive a con
siderable amount of praise in other
quarters. His realism was generally
approved, and many credited him both
with great ability and clear vision. His
speech and the press comment do, however,
make it evident that Sweden has in no
way abandoned her traditional policy of
neutrality and that she is more likely to
allow herself to be influenced by threats
and cajolery than by considerations of
moral right to which she cannot be blind.
Norway
While M. Unden was expounding his
doctrines across the border, the Norwegian
people were gathering to pay homage to
King Haakon on his 75th birthday. The
immense popularity which surrounds the
person of King Haakon was once more
illustrated in a most striking manner, and
it is not without significance that the
Norwegian Communist press should vie
with the most conservative papers in
singing his praise.
The day itself was marked by various
State functions, and after attending a
service in the Church of our Saviour the
Royal party drove to the palace through
the crowded streets of Oslo. Later the
King was presented with a yacht as a gift
from the Norwegian people, the money
having been raised by public subscription.
In a speech from the balcony of the Town
Hall, during which he was repeatedly
interrupted by cheering, King Haakon
said inter alia that he believed he had
gained the trust of the people because he
had himself before the coronation insisted
upon a referendum. ‘ c When I made that
decision, it was because I wished to
become a rallying-point and not a cause of
conflict. Forty-two years later I believe
1 can now say that I have attained the
objective I set out to achieve.”
Curtailed as the royal power must of
necessity be within a limited monarchy
there can be little doubt that in Norway
today King Haakon is by far the most
important single factor. His prestige and
popularity have certainly never been
equalled in modem times, and in the
affection and loyalty with which he is
regarded by his people he can stand com
parison, probably with the later years of
the reign of Queen Victoria.
f*
THE LOW COUNTRIES
Belgium
After intermittent debates beginning on
the 31st July, the Belgian Senate ratified
the Belgo-Netherlands-Luxembourg Cus
toms Union {Benelux) on the 13th August
by 93 votes to 14, with 21 abstentions. The
most important contribution to the series
of debates came from M. Paul van Zeeland,
the Catholic ex-Prime Minister, who had
been responsible for drawing up the Senate
Foreign Affairs Committee’s report on
Benelux. In the course of a long speech,
delivered on the 7th August, M. van Zee-
land said that the consequences of the
removal of customs barriers for “certain
Belgian producers 5 ’ ought not to be
exaggerated. The overriding considera
tion was that the level of the Belgian and
Dutch economies should be maintained and
strengthened. M. van Zeeland added that
he did not fear Dutch industrial compe
tition, though he admitted the possibility
of “ difficulties ” for (Belgian) agricul
ture. The measures now before them, he
went on, were, after all, transitory; and
those who would be affected by them had to
be given time to adapt themselves to the
new economic conditions so created. Each
membei of Benelux was free to take what
ever steps were necessary when prices did
eventually fall and when its market was
invaded. He pleaded strongly for ratifica
tion as the only road to safety. The
alternative was a return to “ nationalistic
methods and protective tariffs ” : surely no
one to-day believed that the foundations of
economic recovery rested upon nationalism
and tariffs ? The new road along which
they had to travel ought first to lead to
reconciliation among European States, and
ultimately to reconciliation among the
States of the whole world. The association
of Belgium and the Netherlands was the
first step towards the formation of a
Western European bloc. The prosperity
which Belgium at present enjoyed was
precarious, said Mr. van Zeeland in con
clusion : if a world crisis developed, the
country would suffer heavily. Even if
economic conditions remained as they were,
Belgium could not maintain her state of
prosperity unless she developed her eco
nomy. He did not minimize the difficulties
which would have to be faced in applying