The League of Nations as a Factor in World Peace

Radio Record, Volume I, Issue 34, 9 March 1928, Page 13

The League of Nations as a Factor in World Peace

Radio broadcasting undoubtedly takes a high place as a definite factor in world peace because through it the barriers of distance and misunderstandings are reduced. Another force working definitely and objectively to the same end is the League of Nations and listeners from 2YA were recently afforded the opportunity of learning something of the League’s work from a New Zealander on its permanent secretariat, Mr. J. V. Wilson. The main points of this address are here reproduced.

=, HE League of Natiotts, to hAl which nearly all the States of the world beJong, does many things He, for the common good or its members. ‘To name a few examples among many, it works to prevent the spread of disease, to adjust economic and labour conditions befween nations, to suppress evils like the drug traffic. It is in everyday, unspectacular work of this kind that the Assembly of the League and its permanent Secretariat at Geneva (as a member of which I have been honoured by an invitation to address you) is chiefly. occupied. If you were to read one of the many pamphlets on the League’s work you would, I think, be surprised at the number of tasks with which the League has been entrusted, and at their wide scope-for the League’s work is universal, and not merely European, as some people think. ‘ There is, however, one work of the League in which everyone may be expected to take some interest, and that is, what it does to prevent war; and first let me refer to what the League means to Britain, to which, of all countries, peace must remain the supreme political interest.

THE ATTITUDE OF BRITAIN. T the last Assembly of the League, in September, the Foreign Minister of Great Britain, Sir Austen Chamberlain, after consultation with the representatives of the other parts of the British Empire, said: ‘‘We base our whole policy on the League of Nations." ‘This, or similar declarations, have often been made by the British Government. Moreover, not only the present Conservative Government of Great Britain, but a Labour or Liberal Government would certainly say the same. Now the British Government has al-

ways had the reputation of being realistic in politics, and we may take it that when it declares that it is on the League of Nations that it bases its whole policy and the security of the vast interests it has in its charge, it thinkS that it is not building on sand. What does this profession mean? It means, essentially, that we see in the League system a better means of keeping the peace than in the old systems, such as alliances, The kernel of the new system is this: that when « threat of war arises, the Council of the League of Nations shall, on the demand of any one member of the League, meet in order to attempt to effect a settlement. This Council is a body which has a right to be heard in such a case because on it sit the representatives-usually the Foreign Ministers themselyes-of the great Powers, except, of course, those ‘two which still remain outside the League of Nations-the United States and the Soviet Union-and also repre-

sentatives of smaller countries. in the face of so representative a body a State which desires to go to war finds itself condemned by the general opinion of the world, and that is a thing which no nation, however strong, can lightly challenge. Experience shows that even if, in a given crisis, one or two countries would be glad to see war break out, the great majority desires peace to be maintained. The problem is how to make this desire effective, and, by forcing the nations to confer, the League’s machinery makes possible, to an extent unknown before, the mobilisation of those ‘forces working for peace. In 1914 Sir Edward Grey tried to anticipate the League system: he asked for a confer-

ence of the great Powers, but then there was no obligation to confer, A PRACTICAL TEST. puis system has been put to the test more than once. The latest example occurred two years ago when, owing to a frontier incident, hostilities had actually broken out between Greece and Bulgaria. A telegram from the Bulgarian Government to the Secre-tary-General of the League of Nations, asking for a meeting of the Council, was received at Geneva about’ 6 o’clock one Monday morning. Within three days the Council met. The conflict. was stopped and reparations were exacted from and paid by the nation which was judged to have been in the wrong. Things would not always work as smoothly as this, but such were the facts in this case.

Bet often, as we know, there is tension between countries for a long time before there is any threat of war. Can nothing be done to relieve this tension before war loonis near? ‘The situation, too, is provided for in the Covenant of the League of Nations, which declares that it is the friendly right of any member to bring before the Council any circumstances whatever which threatens to disturb ‘the peace of the good understanding between nations on which peace d. pends. ‘his ‘friendly right" has been used many times, with good results. Many gathering storms have been dispersed by early reference of a dispute to the Council, which has been able to use its conciliatory influence. The most recent case is that of a quarrel between Poland and Lithuania, dealt with by the Council at its regular threemonthly meeting last December. By the way, lest it be thought that | because neither of these countries is a great Power the dispute itself was of

small moment, it may be as well to say that if it had been aggravated it might easily have involved Germany, the Soviet’ Union, and other Powers. One might say, ‘Yes, the League is helpful if countries use it, but what of the Great Powers who warn the League off when they themselves have a quarrel?" This "hands off’ attitude is certainly not infrequent, but it will not wholly disappear even when the League acquires that full authority to which it is tending, because in a given dispute it will always be a matter of opinion whether a settlement could best be obtained directly through diplomacy, or by a full international discussion through the League. But when a dispute becomes really grave, or war seems imminent, it seems inconceivable that even at the present stage of the League’s development it should not be referred to the Council, whether it affected a great Power or a small Power.

IS THERE CO-OPERATION? Se far I have been dealing with the League’s methods of action in crises. Now, people may admit that the new methods are better than the old, but, as methods and machinery are not everything, will feel that no real progress has been made be-| cause of a supposed absence of the spirit of co-operation. This objection certainly has weight. Nations have not yet acquired full confidence in one another, and it is well to realise that the growth of this confidence-the sole sure hasic of peace-will take time. Take

the present concrete problem Of tiie reduction of armaments. Manv nations (Great Britain amongst them) desire. both for reasons of economy and for reasons of policy, a big reduction of armaments, and, above all, the cessa‘tion of international competition in armaments. ‘The problem is approaching a critical stage, and you will see from the papers that preparations (in which you are taking part, not only as members of the League, but the powers outside the League-such as the

‘United States and the Soviet Union), are being made for a first conference on the reduction of armaments. It is. possible that such a conference wilt achieve little more than a general limitation, and slight lowering of the ‘present scale of armaments, Yet even a slight reduction voluntarily agreed" to by all nations will be a gain, and will

tend to create that mutual conndence which will make further and bigger reductions possible. In a way, the success of the league in any one of its works is a thermometer which registers the degree of the world’s willingness to co-operate. Sometimes the mercury mounts fairly high, sometimes it drops near to zero; the simile is not perfect, because the league thermometer itself helps to raise the temperature, The Geneva atmosphere, of which a good deal-perhaps too mnch-is said, has helped to solve many tough problems, but it is nothing miraculons, ‘it merely means the spirit of mutual understanding and compromise, which we have long known in everyday life, but are slow to believe to bé applicable to international affairs. This readjustment of opinion is taking place more quick‘in some countries than in others, and the fact that the league works with growing success in so many fields is assisting it. If vou read atteritively the

newspaper reports of the work of the League, even if you read no more, you will, I think, come to feel that the League has salvaged much of what has good in the aims of those who fought; and when vou think in terms of practical politics of what the alternatives are to the programme of co-operation, which the League sets forth, you will, nerhans feel less surprise that the Teading statesmen of this Tmnire shonld declare that they hace their whote noticev an the. TWeaene: vou will realise thot the TLeaene has already achieved mnch, an. eiven popular interest, will achieve more.

i HOPE I have helped to show the prog-essive nature of the Leagne’s growth, and to correct the common idea that it is an organisation maintained at huge expense to announce to the world that there can be no more war, To prevent war is indeed the principal aim of the League, but the League makes no prophecies-it merely works.. Its cost, hy the way, to the people of New Zealand, is 14d. per head per year.