TO PREVENT WARS.

Evening Star, Issue 19797, 22 February 1928, Page 4

TO PREVENT WARS.

The Committee on Arbitration and Security which is working with the Disarmament Committee of the League of Nations has made a good start with its deliberations. By not attempting to do too much the committee has the prospect of achieving more than if some ambitious programme, involving the joint commitment of all the nations, half of whom would certainly not agree to it, were put forward. The British 1 1 in for the multiplication cf separate pacts, by. which different nations would agree not to attack each other and to support each other in the defence of special interests, has been approved by the chairman, Dr Benes, the sagacious Foreign Minister of Czeclio-Slovakia, and promises to gain the adherence of the committee. Not one Locarno for Europe or the world, but as many little Locarnos as possible, is the theory, it is interesting to compare this plan with th-' proposals for outlawing war which have come recently from France and America. In April last, on the tenth anniversary of America’s entry into the World War, M. Briand made an announcement that ho was prepared to make a treaty with the United States to “ renounce war as an instrument of policy between the two nations,” leaving ns legitimate only those measures for defence which every nation, as well as every individual, must be prepared to take as a condition of its continuing existence. The reply of Air Ncllogg, Secretary of State for America, made early this year, took the form of n suggestion that the agreement should not be limited to the two countries but extended to everyone. To quote the words of the Note, it was proposed that France should join with the United Stiites ]n an effort to commit “all the principal Powers of the world to the condemnation and renunciation of war as a national policy in favor of the pacific settlement of international disputes.” France did not object to this, but suggested that the agreement should be confined to wars of aggression. This was not agreeable to American officials, and tho defects of both suggestions are very obvious. 3he American proposal really went no further than to ask the European Powers to commit themselves to a principle to which they are already, committed through the League of Nations. The French amendment of it introduced the difficulty, almost insurmountable in special cases, of defining what is a war of aggression. That has been defined, for practical by the Covenant of tho League of Nations, hut America would never agree to the League’s definition. Another objection to tho French proposal is that it woidd amount in laet to a defensive alliance between the United States and Franco by which each country would he bound not to take part in any act of war, not even a blockade, against tho other. France has certain commitments under th Covenant of the League of Nations; such an agreement would bind tho United States to tho passive support of France, even if Franco should bo declared an . aggressor State by tho Longue, and that body attempted to invoke against France tho punitive measures with which the Covenant arras it. It is hard to see much promise of result in the Franco-American negotiations. The agreements approved by the committee oF the League, being limited to special circumstances and special problems, may take, us a step forward. Tho most hopeful feature of all these plans for tho outlawing of war is that there was never in the world before such a general desire to get rid of it. That is shown by the multiplicity of the plans and tho constant discussion of them.