Images (13)
Document
| id |
id
195989252
|
|---|---|
| contentType |
contentType
document
|
| source |
source
import
|
Source image fields (6)
Extracted text
OCR Page 1 of 13Mi Sweeney
Summary from the Afrikaans Press:
August 10, 1951.
In its editorial of August 6, 1951, "DIE BURGER" (N.P.)
states that in defense discussions between South Africa,
Britain and other friendly Western states of recent times,
one question has seldom been openly broached although it is
one which is surely uppermost in the mind of the South
African government: it is the position of the British naval
base at Simonstown.
British control over this important point of appui on
South African soil has become more anomalous since the
growth of our sovereign independence has been extended to
the military sphere as well. The time now appears to be
ripe for making a change that will remove an irritating sur-
vival of the days of South Africa's subordination.
When, during and after World War I, the defense of
South Africa was wholly transferred to the South African
government, Simonstown was excluded as being a vital link
in British imperial communications. XXXX In 1921 General
Smuts, as a matter of 'honor and duty' undertook, on behalf
of South Africa, the defense of that base and that under-
taking still governs the position of Simonstown to-day.
Between the two world wars the problem received atten-
tion particularly insofar as it may infduence the Union's
right of neutrality in a war in which Britain may become
involved. An undertaking to defend Simonstown against a
British enemy is surely irreconcilable in principle with
South Africa's liberty to remain aloof in a British war.
Britain itself was not anxious to transfer an important
British base to South African control because, in time of
war, a neutral South Africa might perhaps deny the British
fleet urgent facilities.
Meanwhile the background of the problem has changed
considerable. Through its government South Africa has un-
equivocally declared its alliance with the Western world --
also in the matter of defense. In a battle against a common
danger all possible aid will be given to allies, just as all
possible aid will be expected from them. While the stand-
point in favor of transfer because of our sovereign independ-
ence has not wakened in a single respect, the chief practical
considerations against such transfer (from the British point
of view, have -- to a great extent -- fallen away.
In the meantime Pouth Africa's own navy has come of
age, ready and able to assume greater responsibilities in
the event of war than in the days of its babyhood. It has re-
ceived equal status with the army and air force and is
steadily growing stronger. The recent establishment of a
marine corps as an additional element in our coastal defense
and the proposed purchase of a second destroyer also point
in this direction.
We have need of a suitable naval base of our own which
will, naturally, be put at the disposal of allied navies.
The acceptance of the principle of transfer by Britain will
do much to promote a spirit of trust and co-operation in the
forthcoming military discussions. As long as Simonstown re-
mains under British control the feeling that Britain is re-
luctant to recognize a situation of sovereign equality in
its relations with South Africa will persist. It would be
THE ЬОВЕІСИ SEBAICE
far better/
Relations
belongs_to
belongs_to