The Evening Star THURSDAY, OCTOBER 1, 1936. MR JORDAN AND THE LEAGUE.

Evening Star, Issue 22458, 1 October 1936, Page 10

The Evening Star THURSDAY, OCTOBER 1, 1936. MR JORDAN AND THE LEAGUE.

Mr Jordan evidently has been attracting attention to himself in the League of Nations. He did so at his first appearance as a member of the committee charged with consideration of Abyssinia’s claim to be represented at the Assembly. There was a movement to shut out Abyssinia, or to defer decision on her claim in a manner that would have amounted to the same thing, on the ground that she had no Government to be represented. The real object was conciliation of the Italians, who were believed to be unlikely to attend if Abyssinian delegates were admitted. The League has never recognised Italy’s acquirement of Abyssinia. The course of logic and equity, as opposed to the course of expediency, was plain. We imagine that Mr Jordan’s stand, in insisting on admission of the unhappy State, did not require much independence on his part. It allowed Great Britain’s vote to be cast for justice without the odium of an initiative which would have made new offence for Italy. New Zealand could not give offence. The vote was so generally supported as to suggest virtual agreement on the merits of the question. In the Assembly Mr Jordan has been as outspoken on subjects that leave more scope for differences of opinion. He condemned the League’s weakness in its general treatment of Abyssinia. It is doubtful if that was worth while. Ho was on doubtful ground in saying that the League lapsed into futility “ as the result of the vacillation of Governments, not as the result of indecision of the peoples.” Tf there was one sentiment attributed to the British people in the course of the recent crisis it was a willingness to back their Government in support of Abyssinia to the furthest point—short of measures

that might provoke another war, for which in any ease they were unprepared. The French were less willing to have trouble with Italy while they were in ignorance of what Germany might do. Mr Jordan was right in saying that the fault of past failure was not in the Covenant and that sanctions would be just as ineffective in the future unless they were immediate and automatic; but bow to ensure that they will be immediate and automatic and without exceptions among fifty nations remains a task. The Powers that have been most willing, so far, to see extreme rigour given to sanctions have been those that have had least to lose. Regional pacts, which Mr Jordan opposed, have their disadvantages, but when wider pacts are unobtainable they have their value. And a plebiscite of either the German or the Italian people to see whether they were “ willing to support the League ” would be unlikely to be much less of a farce than a Spanish election. The ‘ Christian Science Monitor ’ put a question recently to its readers, “ Does the peace machinery of the world need reforming or do we?” It was a pertinent question, and the fact that its “we ” meant more than Governments was indicative of the largeness of the query.