LEAGUE OF NATIONS

Hokitika Guardian, 23 November 1920, Page 3

LEAGUE OF NATIONS

(AUSTRALIAN N.Z GABLE ASSOCIATION] COURSE OF DISCUSSION. (Received This Day at 10,40 a.m.) LONDON, Nov. 22. A feature of the sitting of the Fifth Commission at Geneva was the support accorded by Prince Ranjitsinghi to Mr Millen’s view that all admissions of new States should be inspired by sentiments of justice. Ranji emphasised Mr Millen’s remarks, declaring we should be just to friends first, before displaying generosity to enemies. The Commission is opposed to the jurists draft report on legal points concerning admission, also a sub-committee to examine claims for admission. The Assembly discussed the position of Armenia. Mr Balfour outlined the practical difficulties in the tragic situation. Good intentions were perfectly useless, unless means could be found to carry them out. One of the most -serious difficulties was that the Covenant wws not contrived to deal with a

situation like Armenia, but with organised civilised. States, with clearly marked frontiers./ Armenia did not possess these. We were not dealing with civilised states or a people whom public opinion could affect. Kemal Pasha was absolutely indifferent to the the world’s opinion. The League had no power unless some nations were prepared to accept a mandatory. If ..America be willing she had the public spirit and money to caary out the task. If hot,, the League must look elsewhere. No mandatory were likely to find men, unless other States guaranteed 1 assistance. ' PARIS, November 22. The “Matin’says the League of Nations adopted M. Vivani’s motion not to consider Germany and Russia’s admission untii they had satisfied international obligations.

(Received This Day at 1.5. p.m.) LONDON, November 22. M. Viviani said he was disappointed at Mr Balfour’s discouraging speech. If they failed to find a mandatory, they would incur the ridicule of the world. The League had the whole responsibility without possessing the power. When France suggested an international army it had been rejected. If it had been accepted, the position would have been different to-day. M. Viviani suggested the League should instruct the Council to find a'power who, without taking a mandate, wouild intervene. There should be negotiation in the conflict between Armenians and Kemaifcists. The Council should telegraph forthwith to every nation asking whether they would undertake to intervene. If all refused, then the League would be able to realise its inability to do anything without international force. (Received This Day at 1.5. p.m.) LONDON, Nov. 22.

Hon. A. J. Balfour said he failed to realise how they could intervene. What could be offer Kemal Pasha that he would accept. They had also to remember that the Allied Powers were still dealing with settlements under the Turkish Treaty. He asked the French to define what they meant by negotiations. M. Viviani replied that perhaps mediation was a better word than intervention, the nation undertaking the task could apply to the Powers to ascertain how far it could go. We must first know whether Kemal was amenable to negotiations. We could only try, otherwise we might continue this theoretical * debate and admit our inability to help suffering humanity. He insisted something must be done. Lord Cecil said he believed if negotiations. Jailed, a force could be secured to same Armenians. M. Vivani’s suggestion was adopted.