Mr. NORMAN JAQUES (Wetaskiwin):
Mr. Speaker, during the time at my disposal this afternoon I intend to discuss external affairs, first, because I happen to be a member of the committee on external affairs; second, because the house seldom, if ever, has the opportunity of discussing external affairs; third, because of certain developments which are taking place in the world today, and last, because of a statement that was made by the Prime Minister (Mr. Mackenzie King) just before this house met after the Christmas adjournment. According to the press report on January 20, the Prime Minister is reported as follows:
The world was in an "appallingly dangerous condition" today. "Let us not speak of having entered upon an era of peace," Mr. King warned, "where all about us are evidences of strife."
Then the day before yesterday the leader of the C.C.F. party directed a question to the Secretary of State for External Affairs (Mr. St. Laurent) in these words, as reported at page 1282 of Hansard:
In view of the grave warning by the Palestine commission to the security council yesterday that " tragic and dangerous precedent" will be established if force or the threat of force is allowed to thwart the decision of the united nations, is the government prepared to accept its share of responsibility in such action as may be taken by the security council wi th the view to averting further bloodshed in Palestine and implementing the assembly decision?
I do not intend to read the answer made by the minister; neither shall I attempt to interpret it. But apparently it has caused speculation in the press. If, as some people seem to think, it means that Canada is to be committed to armed intervention in Palestine, I wish to put on record at this time the fact that I am absolutely opposed to it. May I 5849-89i
refer to a speech that I made in this house two years ago last December. On December 17, 1945, speaking on external affairs, I said, as reported at page 3706 of Hansard:
I have no brief for either Arabs or Jews-
I should have said "Zionists" there.
-but it seems to me that the public hears only the Zionist arguments, never the Arab side of the question. As I have said, I have no brief for either side; my sole concern is to establish the truth, for just as truth and freedom are indivisible, so mutual faith in the given word is the basis of friendship, individual and international. Once that faith is destroyed or even impaired, trust and friendship turn to suspicion and hatred. But instead of historic fact, the Zionists base their case on racial, cultural and commercial superiority. These claims on behalf of a favoured nation and a chosen people are upheld especially by leftists and internationalists, by the very pe iple who denounce racism and nationalism. They also are the people who claim especially to be the world's peacemakers but who, in the face of continued and fatal rioting in Palestine, are going out of their way to embarrass Great Britain in her efforts to maintain peace by encouraging tolerance by both Arab and Jew.
Then a little later on in my speech I said:
Quite recently it was reported that the national leader of the C.C.F. at a public meeting in Washington, "urged the immediate opening of Palestine for Jewish immigration to the fullest possible extent so as to provide a refuge from the terror of their persecutors." In the light of the present critical conditions in Palestine, I would ask the leader of the C.C.F.: Can he assure us in making those demands that he is promoting the interests of world peace? Does he realize that such demands are calculated to embarrass Great Britain and if insisted on may lead to a clash of interests between the British empire, the United States of America and the U.S.S.R.? In the event of war in Palestine and the near east, is he prepared to commit Canadians to active service in such a war? If not, whom would he expect to fight it?
Those are the words I spoke here two years ago last December, I think subsequent events have justified what I then said. The question of partition is the one question which has come before the UNO upon which Russia is in agreement.
Subtopic: CONTINUATION OP DEBATE ON ADDRESS IN REPLY