The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 24th., 1931. THE PLACE OF DISARMAMENT.

Hokitika Guardian, 24 February 1931, Page 4

The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 24th., 1931. THE PLACE OF DISARMAMENT.

'l'nKitr: is a large amount of cautious cominonseuse in the remark of the First Lord of the Admiralty, lately uttered upon naval disarmament, “1 think you can go to quickly in this matter.’.’ Nor can it be regarded as inconsistent with the part which Great Britain took both at the Five-Power Naval Conference of last year and at the meeting of the League's Preparatory Commission on Disarmament in November. British opinion, as expressed through the Government, has been clearly shown as definitely favourable to the acceptance of any disarmament proposals which may gain international support. It is probable that there are nations, says the Otago limes, which

have come to regard Great Britain as the prime mover in the endeavour to secure fresh guarantees of the preservation fil peace. There is a di sposjiion on their part to look to Great Ibilain to set an example in her plans ■or disarmament provided other Powers arc prepared to co-operate with her. hi the near luturc, possibly within .12 months, will bo held the International Disarmament Conference for which tlge Preparatory Commiss.on has already prepared a draft convention. It is ioped that at this conference some ilty or sixty commies, including in.-,sin and the United States, will he (■presented, and that an agreement ill then be reached of such a character s will give efleet to the proposals of :e Preparatory Commission. In the ference nasdinblos it is desirable that every cflort shall be made by the sympathetic tuitions to create n popular sentiment that will inspire the more laggard Powers with a realisation of the real importance and value of dis- ) armament by agreement. This view was not expressed too strongly by the British Foreign Secretary in a speech last week in which he said that “the friends of peace had 12 months in "'hi('h to mobilise opinion in favour ■ ol a great opportunity which might not recur.” Mr Henderson was assuredly not exaggerating when he added that if another war should unhut unatcly occur it would bring with it destruction ol Ijle on a scale such as had not been imagined, and that the catastrophe might a.dully engulf civilisation itself. Great Britain lias demonstrated a desire to embrace disarmament in the widest sense consonant with considerations of national security, and is prepared to go a long way in providing, a basis for amicable agreement among tbe Powers. \ iscount Cecil, a zealous worker in the cause of world peace, was doubtless expressing the opinion of the majority

ol Britons when, jn a recent speech, he remarked in regard to the proposed conference: “For once our interests and our duty obviously coincide.” He added that it might he necessary to pay a price for disarmament in the way ol promising to defend any nation which, after subscribing to limitation treaties, should he attacked. It is not iietbssary to accept tiie somewhat doubtful logic of this reasoning, but flic implication that if sacrificed life entailed in the interest!) of peace Great Britain will be prepared to make them may be accepted. His reminder that it is tiie responsibility of the British people to stand behind its Governments in disarmament negotiations cannot be neglected, for it is necessary, if tiie confidence of other and smaller nations in the convention is to be fostered, that Great Britain should express unreservedly her sympathy with the readiness to participate in measures of disarmament. “We must make it clear to other nations that we regard disarmament as fundamental to our relations with them.” Viscount Cecil said. “We must say to them, ‘if you desire our friendship, you must make it possible for us to carry out this policy.’ ” The next few months will be important to the International Disarmament Conference, for in his period its decisions, as reflections of international public feeling, will to a large extent he made. It would, therefore, he most unfortunate if anything should happen that might conceivably be. interpreted as betraying a tendency towards a weakening of the resolution of Great Britain towards disarmament. The danger which Mr Alexander indicated, that too much haste might be made towards disarmament, certainly exists, hut there is another danger also to be avoided—that of exciting the impression among foreign nations that there is any cooling of British sympathy with the principle of disarmament as a means of ensuring international peace.