HOPEFUL OUTLOOK

Hokitika Guardian, 29 May 1933, Page 5

HOPEFUL OUTLOOK

FOR DISARMAMENT

SIR J. SIMON’S COMMONS SPEECH

c (Per British Official "Wireless.) ' RUGBY, May 26. Recent developments at the Disarma- • meat Conference were examined by - Cabinet. Sir John Simon attended. Sir John Simon, during the foreign i affairs debate in the House of Commons, amde an important . statement, declaring that the United States peace declaration constituted a fundamental change in her position in regard to -neutrality. The fundamental principle cf her doctrine before 1914 was the obligation of neutral States to show complete impartiality between the contesting Powers. At Geneva Mr Norman Davies indicated that so far as America was concerned the law of neutrality was being modified, and the United States was ready to contribute in other ways towards the organisation of peace. They were willing to consult with the other States in the event ■of a threat to peace, with a view to taking action to stop it. It was of first importance that this declaration should not be exaggerated or distorted by one hair’s-breadth. The United States insisted that it must preserve its own independent judgment in connection with any dispute, and there was m> ground for complaint about that,

But If in some, future conflict the na< tions in consultation decided tp take action tp prevent- sustenance or succour going to a wrongdoer, Mr Davis’s declaration meant that the 1 United States, if it agreed with the view <>f tli e consulting States, would refrain from any action tending to* defeat any action which the consulting States might take. In other words, the old idea of standing with folded arms between the aggressor nation and an oppressed nation had gone. It was impossible to exaggerate the importance of this. Sir John Simon explained that," in view of this declaration, alterations in the security section of the draft convention became necessary, and he prepared a new draft providing in the event of a breach, or threatened breach, that an invitation for an immediate consultation, might, be made by. .the league. They' 'had;' rea'-bn .to believe that the United ‘States' would be prepared to enter into such a consultation,"and he was happy to find that the United States proposed to associate itself with this part .of. the..treaty -by a- unilateral declaration, there being constitutional difficulties in doing so in any other way. ... ’. ’ . Sir John Simon, while claiming that real progress had been made at Geneva, admitted that there were extremely disturbing - storm ’ signals about. .;He. welcomed the statesmanlike and moderate tone, of Herr Hitler’s Reichstag declaration and the withdrawal of the, German amendments},, and. declared that a good epirit was being displayed in ; the determination .to discuss the British plan, article by.-article,.

In the snbseqp.ent. debate, Mr. George Lansbury/Labour Leader,/ . questioned tht? efficiency qf new conventions when, as in the case of Japan, the old.ones were not being observed. Sir Austen Chamberlain said that lie regrded Sir Jolm Simon’s speech as the most encouraging it had been in the power of any Foreign Secretary to make for many years. He was not satisfied that it was practicable or desirable to design a formula to be applied in finding the aggressor in a case of breach of the peace. It was net difficult to recognise an act cf aggression, though it might be impossible to define an aggressor. While welcoming Herr Hitler’s speech, which (if taken on its face value, as lie would like to take it) was a happy omen for hopeful relations between Germany and the world lie was surprised that there had been no direct repudiation of the statements of some of the Chancellor’s colleagues. He hoped that he could take the speech as a silent repudiation cf Herr Nadolny’s re-armament threat and the terrible speech of Captain von Papen.