THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS.

Evening Star, Issue 19659, 12 September 1927, Page 4

THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS.

Three years that have passed since the Geneva Protocol was a main hope of peacemakers affords a sufficient interval for most people to have forgotten what it was all about. Since an attempt has been made to revive it at the Assembly of the League of Nations which is now sitting, and tho attempt may be made again, it is worth while to recall something of its great plan, its object was to strengthen the sanctions of the League’s Covenant, providing for common action against nations preferring war to arbitration; to strengthen tlie system ot arbitration; and, by thus providing increased security against aggression for all nations, to make it easier lor them to agree to a reduction of armaments at a conference to b© held later. That conference lies still in the future, aud as the outlook for it, following the discussions of the League’s Preparatory Commission and tho breakdown of Mr Coolidge’s naval conference, could hardly bo more discouraging in present circumstances, it is natural that the thought should have occurred of improving its chances by reviving an earlier plan. Let the nations’ mutual fears be once removed, the Dutch delegate who sought to revive it no doubt reasoned, and the chief obstacle to smaller armaments will have disappeared. It was the object of tho Protocol to provide this new security; but, unfortunately, it bad difficulties of its own. It was not more an instrument for the preserving of peace than an instrument for the making of war—common war by its combined signatories against an aggressor State. An aggressor State was defined as one which should refuse to submit its case to arbitration. Apart from the difficulty of distinguishing between domestic issues, which no country would submit to arbitration, and those which were international, the

Protocol threatened to mean that the British Navy would be charged with the invidious task of becoming the policeman of all nations. And that responsibility Great Britain refused to accept.

The Protocol was agreed to by the Assembly of 1924, but it was never ratified. Its place was taken by the Locarno treaties, for mutual defence and security, under which responsibilities were limited instead of being worldwide. They have not given all the sense of security that was hoped lor. France does not consider, for example, guarantees which she has received as dispensing in any measure with the necessity for an army of occupation in the Rhineland, and Germany, in addition to her agreement with France and Britain, has a treaty of reinsurance with Russia. There was no reason to suppose, however, that the difficulties which proved fatal to the Geneva Protocol throe years ago would bo ess strong at the present time, and they have been strong enough to destroy the attempt at its revival. Britain has refused also, very naturally, to tale any responsibilities upon her for llu peace of Germany’s eastern frontier. All that tho latest Assembly lias been able to do. therefore, in pursuit d the greatest objects for which the League was formed, has been to pass a resolution against aggressive wars which really goes no further than its original Covenant. Outside that chief domain it has done two important things. It has given to Germany, who disunions any intention of seeking to recover her lost colonics through -ho League, a seat on tho Commission by which their government is supervised, and it has received from Germany an accontaace of a new measure of adhesion to j lie Hague Court o! International Aib if ration. It will bo very far, therefore., from an unimportant Assembly.