DISARMAMENT

Hokitika Guardian, 24 June 1932, Page 5

DISARMAMENT

ECONOMIC RELIEF SOUGHT

NEW PROPOSALS

(British Official Wireless.)

RUGBY, June 23

At a specially summoned meeting of tine General Commission of the Disarmament Conference, the delegates discussed America’s proposals which were similarly made public in Washington. Mr Gibson said lie hoped, the United States delegate proposals, which represented tile substance of instructions given by Mr Hoover for the guidance of the American delegates, won.cl lead til© other nations to state openly, how much, they would contribute to a general programme leading to real disarmament.

His statement proceeded: ‘‘The time has come when we should cut through and announce some broad and definite method of reducing the ovei whelming burden of armaments. Tt will be the most important step to be taken to expedite an economic recovery. We must make headway against the fear and friction arising out of 'armaments, which .kill confidence throughout the world. We can still remain practical in maintaining adequate , self-defence among, all nations. I propose the fol* lowing principles should be our guide i Firstly i The Kellegg-Brinnd pact, to , which we nr© all signatories, can only ' mean that th© nations of the world are agreed they will use their arms ! solely for defence, Sccondy : This reduction should be ' carried out not only by broad general cuts in armaments, but by increasing the comparative power of defence through decrease in power of attack. ! Thirdly: The armaments of the 1 world have grown up in mutual rela- 1 tion to each other. Speaking general- I ly, (such relativity should be preserved •in making reduction. ' Fourthly: Reductions must be real and positive and effect economic relief. - -

Fifthly:. There are three'.problems to be dealt with, land, air and naval forces, all inter-connected.

Mr Gibson then submitted details of Mr Hoover’s proposals.

SUGGESTIONS BY FRANCE

/ SIX PROPOSALS PUT FORTH

•GENEVA, June 22. At a meeting of the Air Commission at the Disarmament Conference, the ■ French delegates submitted a programme of six proposals, viz.: The prohibition of: aerial bombardment ■ 'beyond the battlefields. The internationalisation of commercial' transport rleropljiues. The fixing of maximum tonnage for civil aeroplanes not internationalised. The adoption of measures concerning private manufacture and sale of armaments. The British Air Minister, Lord Londonderry, in undertaking immediate consideration of the proposals, said he believed they would be more acceptable, than the first French proposals, but he emphasised that normal developments of civil aviation must not be hampered.

ATTITUDE OF BRITAIN. TOWARDS AMERICA’S PLAN. RUGBY, June 22. Speaking at the Disarmament Conference at Geneva after the American delegate (Mr Gibson), the British Foreign Secretary (Sir J. Simon) thanked the American delegation for bringing forward the proposals and promised prompt examination. “For we are convinced,” lie said, “than any reasonable step by which the vast total of m©n under arm© throughout the world can he reduced in ways which do not diminish safety, should be welcomed not only for its direct value as a contribution to world disarmament but also because it would Bring with it immense relief in the financial burden/? which are crushing down the taxpayer, threatening by their weight to clog and even bring to a standstill the whole of industry.” Dealing with th© naval proposal, he said: “I entirely agree that substantial proposals in the realm of naval disarmament are required. I doubt whether the proposals just indicated, fi' in some respects adequate and in other respects, appropriate to the Tarring circumstances of the different INavail Powers',. Thera nr© not two men in the world better aeonainted with the second of these difficult tee tea© Mr Hoover and Mr MacDonald. The Washington-T.ondon Naval Oon-te-enrps were magnificent examples bow to translate aspirations as to disarmament into accurate and actual facts, and their (particular merit is ■tliev did take into account, ns far as rossible the varying needs of the differ nt Bowers. As for adequacy, f s'i v holdlv on betel!’ of the United Kingdom deteeation, that in some rernartn we want more disarmament than here appear*. The propos'd that submarines he reduced to an individual T'cteM; of 12.J0 tons appears to ns to fall short of what is needed. Wo war*submarine.*! 1i be entiioß' ,abolished. Tf they pennot lie abolished then n( Vast let their size be limited to 250 tons.”

On the subject of capital shins, he ashed was it- not iwsibte whatever jvn.r cnnitel sldn c/wxitnictinn took

instead of building r, o\v vessels of 35 000 tons weight with 16-ineh , to agree that a much lower limit

both in tonnage and in gun calibre, be established. ITALY’S FULL ACCEPTANCE. LONDON, June 32. At Geneva a remarkable demonstration followed when the Italian delegate, Signor Grnndi, made a declaration which Signor Mussolini had dictated over the telephone. It was to the effect that Italy accepted the American proposal in its entirety. Her acceptance was complete and unconditional.

The meeting thereupon. broke out into a storm of cheers.

OPPOSITION BY FRANCE

APPROVAL OF GERMANY

LONDON, June 23. At the Disarmament Conference, ■ though M. Paul Boncour (France) pro- | raised that France would sympnthetirally consider the scheme, his hostility ito it was lmniistakeable. He constantly referred to the question of security. IHe asked: If the Kellogg Pact signatories were thus denuded of strength, what possibility would there bo of executing the Sanction? Herr Nadolny on behalf of Germany, entirely approved of the plan. His only objection to the proposal was that it was too moderate. M. Mntsudaira, representative of Japan, reserved judgment. A Paris message says: President Hoover’s action is discounted her© aa being largely an electoral manoeuvre, and as being more important to America than it is to Geneva. Th© “Journal Dos Debats” says: “M. Herriot and M. Boncour will know how to deal with this ultimatum 1 We cannot consent to any -reduction of our effectives.” AMERICAN PRESS COMMENT. FULL AGREEMENT ESSENTIAL. . NEW YORK, June 22. The “New Yoi’lc Times,” in a leading article, sass: “Th© President’s intervention at Geneva is both timely and bold. It will be recognised as worthy of statesmanship, being a large conception with a truly noble motive.” The “Nmv York Herald-Tribune” says: “Whatever action is finally taken, it must he common action genuinely iu the interests of all, and not, even in appearance, an attempt to force one view down the throats of those who hold a different view.” BRITISH PRESS CONDITIONS. LONDON, June 23. The press generally here is cautious over President Hoover’s plan, and eontents itself mainly by saying that the plan is entitled to serious consideration. Sir John Simon has departed for London to report to Friday’s Cabinet meeting on the latest 'phases ol both tile Geneva and Lausanne Conferences. JAPANESE OPPOSITION. TOKIO, June 23. Japanese naval authorities are strongly opposed to Mr Hoover’s proposed of a. reduction ol one I lin'd regarding capital ©liipe, of which an unfavourable ratio uijs allotted at the j London treaty in view ol the requirements of national <l> fence. (1.‘1.A. Of J K(TION. WASHINGTON, dune 23. Insistence bv tho French Go\eminent upon the security pact reported in the Geneva press despatches concerning Mi I louver’,< arms proposal i 1 1 f an assert ion to-day I hat high ' Governmental quarters in United State,s, under no conditions, would consider entering into such an agreement.