ARMS EMBARGO

Hokitika Guardian, 1 March 1933, Page 5

ARMS EMBARGO

A HUGE QUESTION BRITAIN’S EXPORT TO EAST. v“ : J -.\y (United Press Association—3y Electric _y. Telegraph—Copyright.) LONDON, February 27. The House, of Commons debated the situation In [the Far East, when the proposal for an embargo on the export of arms, was the subject of an impontaut statement by Sir ,J: Simon, in the 'Commons, who said the' British Government had decided not to issue new" licenses for*, the export .of ‘'arms from Britain either to China or > Japan, but that contracts already entered into for the supply df arms to the F’ar East would not be. Interfered with by the Government. u

The Leader of the Opposition, Mr George Lansbury, in opening the Far East debate, said that after seventeen months’ discussion, the League had decided that Japan wag the aggressor and that her actions were incompatible with membership of the League, and with her signature to the treaties regarding China. Japan had shown a cynical and. blatant disregard of her obligations. There could never be any inherent right in a nation to invado another’s territory, whatever economic interests it . had at Btake. If Huiesia, were brought into the struggle, It was certain a war mania would break out, ond Europe would be ablaze as occurred in 1914. " The • League having decided that . Japan was the aggressor, the sanctions and obligations provided in the-.,covenant, should he put into operation. He hoped the Government would say immediately that no .arms? and ammunitions would be allowed to be exported. Mr, Church i'll: To either side?

Mr Lansbury: My view isi pot to -either side: fTW took the view there should be a complete embargo only against the-, aggressor, and there should’ also be ah embargo on finance and credit. ■ FRIENDLY RELATIONS DESIRED. Sir John Simon- Foreign Secretary, said that the: basis upon which Britain ought to proceed* was to remain good, friends'..with both China and Japan.. He wanted to go everything he could to induce the parties to reach a method of - conciliation. [Tlie Lytton Reuoi’t was a. perfectly . simple document, which said there was no doubt the method® being followed'‘by Japan, and the action® taken ? were not in accordance with the-League Covenant. Very grave injustice, however, would-be fdone* if 'they did not admit the case of Japan was one with many obligations. She had been put to very severe trials by a neighbour extremely difficult to deal with. Lore! Lytton and> his colleagues endeavoured dtoo produce a balanced judgment', and thif-y mitoii® pronounced unanimous approval of'the report of a perfectly fair commission. That was a' fact immense in the history of the world. It was natural that a demand should

arise .calling for-action, which would prevent sustaining; festering, and fojnenting the conflict by the supply of arms. Supplying arms could only he effetcively and finally stopped by international agreement. Unlike most other countries, Britain had a machine which could he weed. He underwood that the United States’ Executive had no power .to prevent exports at present, but he was glad to see the Senate had ' suggested legislation to confer these .powers on the President. The British Government'was awaiting a reply, from half-a-dozen of the principal arms-producing countries,’ as to what could be done by wav of internationah ' A't Hhe very best, it would take some time to get enough information to know whether international decision were possible.

REDUCING RISK OF CONFLICT.

Meanwhile, he laid down this proposition, from which the Government not budge, namely “Was it im. ’. practicable for a single country, acting alone, to differentiate between one combatant and another?” He continued “We have,, done everything in our power to 1 hasten... international consideration of the subject, and, ’pending that .consideration, as from now on, we believe that any effort and . any sacrifices are worth making, which Would reduce the risk

of widening the field of conflict. Existing contracts already entered into must he respected, but subject* to this V we have decided as from to-day, and the opportunity of internaAtonal consultation and decision, isnch, ns I hope for. the Government would • not authorise the issue of licenses for export to either China or Japan of any articles mentioned in . the Arms Export Prohibition Order, 1931. It was the first time, so far as I know, jn which any neutral Government, which manufacturers arms, has taken positive action in this kind in reference to a distant conflict with which we do not mean to concern ourselves.” Concluding, .Sir. J. ’ Simon remarked.

that Mr Lansbury had expressed . the

' View* that recent developments in the V Ear Fast were bringing about a situaJtion fit to be compared with the fear"situation in 1914-18. There was one great difference between 1914 and mow. It no would this Government authorise this country to p e a party to the struggle.

His JAPAN THE BETTER OF, IT?

Sir H. Samuel feared that the effect

of the proposed embargo would he injurious (to the interests of China, and he sought information as to the running contracts. If they meant that Japan would be -able for months or years to have large- quantities of arm® from Britain, he thought- the conscience of the nation would urge that some steps' should he taken to terminate the contracts. Sir Austen Chamberlain said that at the outset, in view of the provocation the Japanese had suffered, lue sympathies were- wholly with Japan,, but as the situation developed, that sympathy diminished. No nation t in the world, however powerful, ' could afford to neglect the judgment of Geneva.

INCREASING ORDERS RECEIVED

FIRM SUPPLIES BOTH SIDES

LONDON, February 27

In the House of Commons, Mr Morgan Jones (Labour, Glamorgan) stated it was understood that a British firm received increasing orders for ammunition for the Far East. One million cartridges , were ordered on December C and another million on December 14, while twenty millions were ordered on January 6 and fifteen I millions, more on January 10. J One factory, he said, was making armament, 3 for Japan in one room, and armaments for China in another. Mr Jones added that Chinese and Japanese buyers had arrived together. They began discussing prices. Eventually they issued a joint ultimatum that the prices must he reduced. j Mr Amery said the whole question j of refusing to supply armaments to belligerents was open to grave doubt. It Plight mean that the party heist equipped for aggression would enjoy full advantage of aggressive preparations, while the party relying on the good faith of others would he penalised. He asked: “What would • have been our position in the Great War if America had adopted the policy our Government have mow cho'sen? Was China going to draw munitions from Russia? Were they going to send munitions from Russia? Were they going to send munitions to Siam 'for Siamec© merchants to forward to China? The Government’s; policy would only he justified on lines of what Sir J. Simon called prudence. but he called it cowardice. Jenan had a powerful case, based on fundamental realities of the situation which were far, ■deeper than this verbiage of the League Covenant. , Sir J. Simon, replying, thanked the House for a generally sympathetic, recemtirvn of the Government decision. The Government could make no statement on the subject of the Sanctions without mature consideration of time and circumstances.