The Taihape Daily Times AND WAIMARINO ADVOCATE WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 30, 1917. A PERMANENT PEACE.

Taihape Daily Times, Issue 219, 31 January 1917, Page 4

The Taihape Daily Times AND WAIMARINO ADVOCATE

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 30, 1917. A PERMANENT PEACE.

(With which is incorporated The Taihape Post and Waimarino News).

It was cabled yesterday that Sir Joseph Ward had stated to a meeting . in London, that the only way that the peace of the world could be perpetu- i ated after the war was by the right- • thinking people of the great Powers i binding themselves together and saying to any Fewer attempting to enter on a destructive course, that they would combine to light the Power to the death. Taking this statement j cursorily it passes as something of im- j portance, but analysed there is found little in it that has not been understood to govern the actions of nations | in arc past. Unless something much | more compelling than attaching signatures to agreements and treaties is forthcoming, what else can there be in the i a taro cai;U in tuo past to prevent the scrapping cl: everything in the way of covenant.* sacredly entered into for safegua'iuing the rights of small na- , tions, and for preserving the peace of ! the world? In the past the "great Few- ; ers have met, discussed, and entered ; into agreements and treaties which, if , enforced, contained all the elements | necessary to make such a war as we are now experiencing an impossibility. Germany has demonstrated beyond all doubt that her endorsement of anything to prevent war is utterly valueless, and even worse than that, for her signature is given to cover up a ore-conceived intention to mislead other signatories. And what better worth has the signature of peace-bel-lowing America been? The United States took part in deliberations and gave vows over her signature that Belgium should not be seized or inter fcied with by any wolfish, bullying neighbour, and yet she has not lifted a finger to stop the tearing up of the agreement bearing her vows, ana which made her a party to the solemn compact that Germany has scrapped. What is the nature of the guarantee that is to make a recurrence of such actions impassible, or even improvable, in any future arrangement on the lines suggested by Sir Joseph Ward? We live in an age that has learned what the terrors and horrors of war mean, and we grasp at every ; word that is put forth as an antidote ::or such an appalling scourge Sir osaph Ward said nothing new; President Wilson has said the same thing "> almost identical words; lesser po.nical lights have voiced something , inilar, but when the very men who , r done nothing to protect and hon- } their signatures hi treaties and I -emetics that have been designedly "rossly violated in tho past, urg-

es the making of new and other compacts, what value can be attached to their utterances? Sir Joseph Ward’s proposal contains but cold comfort; the world knows all about what he advanced; it is what he was unable to supply —the compelling power, something more than the moral obligation that the greater part of the nations of the earth are straining after. We want to know how Germany is to be made to honour her signature in international compacts that will make war impossible in the future. International trust is dead; Germany killed it and the United States has assisted in buryhig it. Sir Joseph talks glibly about combining to fight the Power to death that would dare to enter on a. destructive course, but ho advances nothing to prevent Germany designing with two or three other large Powers to scrap all moral obligations. From past experience it seems tolerably easy to foment discontent with provisions of treaties and the limitations they enforce, and then form up a combination that would venture upon another scrapping expedition. What guarantee is there that America would not again stand aloof, too proud to fight ,but not too proud to dishonour her signature, and allow the sacred compact which she has undertaken to see honourably kept, torn up and flouted in her face? Limitation of armament to an international equality and uniformity would tend to the weakening of Britain to a disastrous extent, unless each Dominion was given the status of a nation, and even in that event there would still be room for doubt. It is of vital import that we should not be hushed with plausibilities. Any 7 coterie of nations could secretly make themselves superior under uniform limitation, and sufficiently so to cause them to disregard obligations, and to plunge the world into another bloody orgy. What the world wants is a reliable scheme for compelling Germany to desist in her desire to become the dominator of Europe, and for compelling nations like America to take the most extreme action, if necessary, in honouring their signatures to treaties and agreements which they have assisted in evolving. President AYilscn’s talk about provisions for compelling peace makes attractive vapour, but at present there is nothing half so reliable in sight as that power, or combination of powers, that has valiantly and honourably stood against the peace-breakers. They have successfully curbed the blood lust and lust for power of Germany-, and until some other Power proves equal to the work, that combination must continue to police the world internationally. Those nations have not been too proud to fight, nor have they dishonoured their engagements, and for the future security it is to that combination who have honoured their signatures with their blood and treasure. the world must look for evolving a scheme that will prevent Germany or any other Power from again destroying the world’s peace. The Allies are not likely to trust Wilson or anyone else that is too proud to fight, and who is without the common decency to resent their compacts being scrapped and flung in their teeth, to invent for them a scheme for ensuring peace. The Allies, when war ends, will he the most powerful combination in the world, and it is to them the world will look for permanent peace.