To Litvinoff’s Aid

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 312, 24 March 1928, Page 1

To Litvinoff’s Aid

ONLY TURKEY RALLIES ARMS AND THE NATIONS Soviet Delegate Annoyed with Britain By Cable.—Press Association. — Copyright. Reed. 9.30 a.m. GENEVA, Friday. •PEWFIK RUSHDI BEY (Turkey) alone rallied to M. LitI vinoff’s aid in the Preparatory Disarmament Commission of the League of Nations, and demanded that the Commission consider the Soviet’s plan with a view to finding the best means of approaching the desired ideal.

]\£R HUGH GIBSON (United States) said that, as a result of sounding, delegates had the opinion that a sufli cient agreement had not been reached to justify beginning the second reading of the report. It would be better to leave the convening to the president’s discretion, perhaps in July or August.

The Russians insisted that the debate had not proved the Soviet proposals to be impracticable, but the chairman, Jonkheer Loudon (Holland) tabled a motion that while the proposals harmonised with mankind’s ideals, they were incapable of being executed. With the existing world conditions, this was only realisable by methods of pacific procedure, and systematic organisation. Therefore the work must proceed on the lines already mapped out. Meanwhile he Governments could examine the Soviet plans. Count Bernstorff revealed a new German viewpoint. Her disarmament, contrary to the League covenant, had not left her sufficient forces to discharge her obligation to the League. M. Litvinoff (Russia) rose late in the afternoon and announced that tomorrow he will submit new proposals for the parties to give up armaments, and invited immediate discussion. — A. and N.Z. ANGRY WITH BRITAIN

The annoyance felt by M. Litvinoff, the Russian observer at the sittings of the Preparatory Committee on Dis- . armament, because of Lord Cushen- . .dun’s scathing denunciation of the Soviet’s proposals for general disarmament, was made evident to-day. Litvinoff devoted the greater part of his reply to an attack on the policy of Britain. In regard to Lord Cushendun’s demand to know whether Russia had changed her policy of interfering in the internal affairs of other nations, XI. Litvinoff said: "I would draw attention to the presence of British troops and naval vessels in Chinese ports and cities, also to her recent Notes to Persia.” He countered Lord Cushendun’s reference to Russia fomenting civil wars with the statement that he might refer to the existence in many countries of organisations of bureaux of Russian emigrants who forged documents against the Soviet. One of these was known as the Zinovieff letter, whidfa was already historical in England. Continuing, M. Litvinoff said Britain and other Powers had done nothing to settle the questions, which rendered it impossible for tile committee to undertake a second reading of the Soviet’s project. This might well be described as sabotage. Nevertheless, although the Soviet had no intention of joining the League of. Nations, it was determined to take a most active part in the work of the committee. When tiie other nations failed to take the initiative in disarmament, the Soviet would take It. SINCERITY OF RUSSIA “That is why we presented our project,” said H. Litvinoff. “It would be a blessing if the cpmmittee would agree to the abolition of armaments. It should willingly sacrifice the articles of the League’s covenant which stand in the way.” He reminded the committee that the Soviet had never made war on anyone, in spite of the fact that it had no obligation under the covenant. M. Litvinoff said he desired to ex- i press Russia’s wish to participate in | the League’s efforts. That would be sufficient proof of her sincerity. He again asked the acceptance of the principle of total disarmament. If the committee accepted that principle, it could study Russia’s proposals article by article. If it rejected it. he would not ask for its further consideration. “TO END ALL WAR” M. Clauzel (France) said the declarations of the delegates had left no doubt as to their attitude. Out of la speakers only Count Bernstorff (Germany) had supported the Soviet’s plan. M. Litvinoff apparently wanted to be ;i martyr, but he should be satisfied with the number of darts he had received. What the League wanted was to end all war civil and international. M. Clauzel concluded by seconding Lord Cushendun’s proposal that the Soviet's plan should be referred to the various Governments, and that in the meantime a meeting be convoked before the September Assembly for tlle P m 'P ose of reading a second time the commit-

tee’s draft of a disarmament project in > connection with which the Powers are . now in agreement on the formerly disputed points.—A. and N.Z. BETTER FORGOTTEN FAILURE AT GENEVA LONDON, Thursday. In the course of the debate on the Naval Estimates in the House of Commons, the First Lord of the Admiralty, Mr. W. C. Bridgeman, in reply to Viscount Cecil, said a letter had recently appeared in the Press referring to the Cabinet’s discussion on the Naval Arms Limitation Conference at Geneva. This was unusual, and he did not propose to violate the secrecy of Cabinet discussions. The proposals were eventually rejected at Geneva, but not over the question of eight-inch guns or total tonnage. Viscountess Astor, Conservative member for Sutton, Plymouth, asked: Would it not be better to forget the Geneva Naval Conference and look forward to the next one? Mr. Bridgeman said he agreed, believing as he did that Britain and the United States were not thinking for the moment of any kind of aggressive warfare. They might hope—if feelings were not aroused and if no mischief were done between the two countries—that, with the foundations laid at Geneva, some satisfactory limitation of naval arms might be agreed upon in the not distant future. —A. and N.Z.-Sun.