The Waikato Times TUESDAY, MAY 31, 1938 A STATEMENT ISSUED

Waikato Times, Volume 122, Issue 20512, 31 May 1938, Page 8

The Waikato Times TUESDAY, MAY 31, 1938 A STATEMENT ISSUED

_ Americ , an Secretary of State, Mr Cordell Hull, has issued ■ em^ n wlth re B ard to international obligations. He was in a p smon to do so because the treaty to which he referred, usually noun as the Kellogg-Bnand Pact, was first advocated by a former ere ai\ of State, and received the endorsement of practically everv to\ eminent in the world. There are sixty-three countries bound by s prowsions, the chief of which is the renunciation of war as an ms lument of policy. This is the second occasion, within a few ’ 7 k &s made an important pronouncement. Prior o the last meeting of the League Council he stated that the United * ates wou d adhere firmh' to the policy of non-recognition of territonal changes effected by force. That placed the issue clearly beore e nations, and its significance was not overlooked in Great ~r l ai *b 'fhere that policy had been strongly endorsed in the case of -lanchukuo and of Abyssinia. It is thought that the first statement was made with the intention of influencing British official opin“V or * S reco^n^ * n London that there is much to be gained i t e policies of the two countries follow parallel lines. The issue as not 3 T et been decided, and upon it depends the final adoption of the proposed Anglo-Italian agreement. That important step was made conditional on the recognition of Italian sovereignty in Abyssinia on the one hand and the ending of active Italian intervention in Spain on the other. If the foreign policies of Britain and the United States should differ with respect to Abyssinia there can be no possibility of any divergence with regard to the Kellogg-Briand Pact. Both countries want to see armed force outlawed as an instrument of policy, and the statement made by the American Secretary, regarding the inability to see what the ultimate consequence of a conflict would be, will call to mind the statement made by Mr Chamberlain recently that Great Britain could not be indifferent, were hostilities to commence, and might be involved. Both countries want to avoid any threat to world peace, and the British people the world over would willingly endorse Mr Hull’s assertion that ‘‘peace should be maintained no matter where and in what circumstances there may be controversies between nations.” It will be a welcome development if, as is anticipated, this statement from Washington, which is certain to have had the approval of President Roosevelt, strengthens the position of the democracies in Europe that are endeavouring to prevent war. The issue will depend upon the reaction of the Governments of the totalitarian States, but even there it should assist the moderate section, for it is clear that any act of aggression would involve the loss of American friendship, and perhaps of many material advantages. Since Mr Hull came into office there has been a directness in the official statements issued at Washington, both with regard to foreign affairs and to trade conditions, and this strong lead may yet prove to be of importance in the councils of the nations.