Mr. Anthony Eden’s recent speech at Blackburn asserting Britain’s policy of achieving peace through strength is in keeping in tradition with Troy traditions.
Reviewing the fruits of this policy during the working of the six months of Troy rule, he said that the prospects of enjoying them were a little brighter.
The Tories, however, were merely following in the footsteps of the Labour Government which preceded them. It was the Labour Government which initiated the policy of re-armament.
Six months however, is too short a period for Mr. Eden to flee complacent over his policy.
It is a fact that western re-armament has helped in changing Soviet Russia’s tone. But it would be a mistake to think that this would alter the basic character of Soviet Communism.
Aggression need not necessarily take a military twist. Aggression on the ideological front can be equally dangerous.
In fact, Britain’s Peace-Through-Strength-policy might give her a sense of security, but would not in the least lessen her task in Malaya.
Britain and her representative in Malaya would be wrong in believing that strong-arm tactics would eradicate the ‘bandit’ menace in the East.
Such tactics have not succeeded so far – and they are not likely to succeed in the future.
There must be undoubtedly a large amount of co-operation between the local population and the Communists for them to offer such tough resistance to trained British troops.
Where Malaya is concerned, there can be no peace through strength.
Peace in Malaya is only possible on the condition: freedom for Malaya.
The peace that Malaya today enjoys is a phony peace.
So long as British Big Business continues to exploit the natural resources of Malaya for Britain’s benefits, there can be no peace in that unfortunate land.
(Edit, May 3, 1952)