Untitled

Hokitika Guardian, 26 July 1933, Page 4

Whiting to the London “Times” upon tlie suggestion that Britain should rely for security on tile abolition of bombing by pact Air-Commodore J. A. Chinnier, secretary-general of the Air League of the British Empire gays:— “lliero arc three logical consequences of such a pact-—neglect of defence against bombing; neglect of regulating bombing by international law to protect areas of dense population ; neglect of research ,to make bombing still moro exact anti accurate. And yet, who will deny that pacts may be broken? Have we not solemn facts against war itself, and do they 'allow us to ignore measures of defence? And if breach of this pact is possible, then our peculiarly vulnerable island will be found inadequately defended, unprotected by international law, and subjected to indiscriminate and inaccurate attack. If we abolish all naval and military aircraft our position ""ill bo stili worse. No control, acceptable from other points of view, can ensure that civil aircraft shall not he used in war, and we shall have still less defence and still less discriminate attack. Passing to the more distant scenes, this pact must deprive us of a powerful police weapon. The taxpayer must find mere millions to carry out our responsibilities in these outlying areas by other means than aircraft, and the nation will suffer loss of life and treasure in frontier wars. *We must make these sacihfices to enable nations to subscribe to yet another pact which the plain man realises will bo broken, The Air League pleads for realism in this matter where vital interests are at stake. So long as aircraft fly, so long must the possibility of bombing exist. The bombis not of itself move reprehensible than the shell; it is its application to the massed civil population which is to be guarded against. Limitation and regulation of this, as of all other armaments, is the only certain step on the road to disarmament which may be taken without prejudicing our sincerity.”