REVOLUTION IN SERBIA

Hokitika Guardian, 3 August 1928, Page 2

REVOLUTION IN SERBIA

SOUTH SLAVS BREAK Australian Press Assn.—United Service BELGRADE, Aug. 2. While Parliament was sitting here, under the new Premier, M. Ivoeroslietzj a rival Parliament, composed of ninety Croat and other Deputies, met at Zagreb, and virtually declared war against the Parliament at Belgrade. They adopted a resolution that its measures in future shall not bo observed outside Serbia proper. DETAILS OF THE CRISIS. LONDON, Aug. 2. The subjects of Jugo-Slavia, in the centre of Europe’s political “powder magazine,” are demanding independence, and a rival Parliament has been established. The Jugo-Slav National Parliament, or bloodstained Skupshtina, representing the medley of race Croats, Slovenia, Albania, Austria, Bosnia, Herbegovina and Southern Hungary, in addition to Montenegro and Serbia, met at Belgrade for the first time since the two Croation deputies were shot dead and others were wounded on July 20th.

The Croats refused to attend, and they held their own Parliament or Snhbr in Zagreb, their old capital, while the Serb Agrarians were also absent, in sympathy with the Croats. '|‘hus the Opiiosition benches were empty, while excited crowds paraded Zagreb's beflagged streets calling for autonomy, and waving banners declaring “Zagreb’s Croatian Serbs cannot be governed from Belgrade.” Their representatives in the Sabor carried t demand for the complete separation of Croatia from Jugo-Slavia. Tlfey resolved to pay no more taxes, and called on other Provinces to join in the struggle against the Serb supremacy. Furthermore, they declared that the kingdoms of Croatia and Montenegro in merging themselves with the kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and Slovenes, did not reckon to lose their national individuality, but that Serbia had abused the constitution in order to establish a hegemony over the rest. The half-empty Skupshtina, sitting in n,n atmosphere of deep depression, received the Zagreb manifesto with indignation. All the Serbs bitterly resented the manifesto’s reference to Montenegro, and the Croats’ call to other Provinces. •

The “Daily Mail’s” correspondent says the Sabor was presided over by M. Prel>idlevitell. It decided to seek an alteration of the South Slavian regime bv every legal means, declaring “the crimes of July 20th. which were an organised attempt to destroy the opposition, make our attendance at the Skupshtina- impossible. Therefore we recommoiid the non-payment of taxes, and the Government of Croatia from Belgrade is no longer recognised.” This, in the opinion of some correspondents means a revolution in South Sla via.

Jt is understood to he evident that the J ugo-Sla-vian Prime Minister, Father Korosec, a Slovene cleric, who was formerly an autonomist and was opposed to a United South Slavia, cannot permanently control the nonGntholic members of the Cabinet. Eighty-tliree Peasant Democratic deputies, three Slovenes, and two Montenegrins attended the Zagreb gathering under the red, white and blue Croatian Hag. It is understood their manifesto has the approval of M. Rnditch, who is ox]iected to preside over the Salior as soon as he is well enough. A Zagreb official bulletin states tbe Peasant Coalition and the Belgrade Government are anxious to avoid civil war. and have ordered the military leaders to show the greatest forbearance. KBANCO-BRITISII PACT. WASHINGTON, August 1. Mr Kellogg, United States Secretary, is discouraged at Sir Austen Chamberlain’s expression of a wish that the United States might be expected actively to support the antiwar treaty in any emergency. Mr Kellogg has reiterated that this treaty has not been designed to involve the United States in European affairs, but to serve as an instrument whereby the Governments should declare their policies themselves in the renunciation ol

war. While the U.S.A. State Department lias chosen to define self-defence as an individual matter, it has declared that it is impossible to define “aggressive war” in advance.

ANGLO-FRENCH ABBANCEMENTS LONDON, August 2.

Dispatches from Geneva suggest high hopes in League circles that the Anglo-French naval agreement will accelerate the summoning of a Disarmament Conference. An impression exists that some of the small European Powers at the September League Assembly will insist on the earliest convocation of the Disarmament Commission to complete its proposals in time for their consideration by the January League Council, to pave the way lor an international conference in 1929. Official circles are inclined to discourage too optimistic expectations from the successful results of the Anglo-French conversations, pointing out that the pair have merely agreed on a proposition to submit to the other Powers. It certainly will be a useful achievement for guiding the naval discussions nearer to the channel of categories of ships, instead ol hulk tonnage, and in this regard it gets back to the Washington starting point and gives a more hopeful prospect of progress, but rather in the direction of armament limitation than of disarmament in the wider sense.

The first quasi-official generalised description of the Anglo-1 rench compromise emanates from the Qaui D’Orsay, viz.. “ Each power is disclosing its building plans under ten thousand tons, such as for light cruisers, destroyers and submarines, so that each may have reciprocal control.” This removes the chief obstacle to a Geneva Disarmament Conference. LONDON, August 2.

The Paris correspondent of “ The Times” says: It is understood the Anglo-French naval agreement is based on the control of armaments. France is ready to undertake to arm her ships in such manner as will render them useful only defensively, but not offensively. Such a compromise has satisfied public opinion. France’s necessities for her coastal defence have been considered, and the protection of the communications with her North African colonies has been assured. The League is largely responsible for the compromise, which is considered to be a gain for the cause of peace at least as important in the field of practical politics as the Kellogg Pact. Naval policy, since the war, has been the principal obstacle in the way of a leal understanding between Franco and Britain. The present agreement removes a great part of the causes preventing disarmament and pacification. Both Governments have made concessions with loyalty and goodwill. - It was France’s highest interest that the British Empire should be secure and prosperous, and it was Britain s highest interest that France should be strong at sea.

AN AMERICAN IDEA. WASHINGTON, August 2. Government circles expressed the hope that the League of Nations, after

a decade of hesitation, would call a world-wide disarmament conference, following on a study of the dispatches concerning the British-French tonnage compromise, the conference to comprise virtually every nation, including the United States, and Russia would also be represented in the contemplated conference. It is said that arrangements for the meeting would be made by the League’s Preparatory Disarmament Commission, which for several years lias struggled with the task of preparing an agenda. One of the foremost obstacles the commission has been unable to overcome so far has been the dispute as to whether naval ships shall he limited on the basis of class or of tonnage. Another controversy preventing progress has been the contention of several Powers that the countries of potential resources should be considered as potential armaments in any disarmament scheme.