Can the League of Nations Save SHANGHAI?

Radio Record, Volume V, Issue 33, 26 February 1932, Page 3

Can the League of Nations Save

SHANGHAI?

by

Mr.

A. C.

Brassington

A 3YA Talk

A° the topic of the League of Nations in the Far East is a rather involved one, I would remind you of one very important fact: that neither Soviet Russia nor the United States of America is a member of the League of Nations. The League has suffered greatly in the past from this notable weakness, and its present task in the Far East is

rendered all the more difficult because both Soviet Russia and the United States of America have vast interests in China. It would be folly for the League of Nations to act except in co-operation with the United States, and the extent of that co-operation must necessarily limit the action which the League Council may from time to time wish to take. Fortunately the United States Government has given the League Council every assistance, but there have necessarily been delays and difficulties. \ Right at the outset, the Japanese Government objected to American participation in the meetings of the League Council, but the Council over-ruled this objection, and an American representative has since joined the League Council in its deliberations. The League of Nations has, therefore, been put to the test in a part of the world where many difficulties exist that would not be found to the same extent in Europe. Every student of international affairs must admit that war between any two great countries must vitally affect the whole world. This is obviously so in any dispute affecting China, which has been the subject of economic exploitation for many years by the great Powers, all of which have important interests to preserve. ‘There is scarcely a country in the world which will not feel acutely the repercussions of an armed conflict on a large scale in the Far East. It must be remembered also that the League of Nations is purely a post-War creation, and has been built upon the determination of the peoples of the world to endeavour to prevent war. The foundation of the League is the sacredness of treaty obligations; in.other words, the

belief of the peoples of the world that the nations will carry out their solemn public promises and agreements. The League can only function satisfactorily with the support of the great majority of the peoples of the world. It is a new machine, and will need many tests and alterations before it can work swiftly and successfully. One can at least claim this for the League

of Nations, that whatever its imperfections, 1t stanas tor Wwortiawide co-operation, as against war and the international anarchy that war brings. It is, therefore, to be expected that the men in control of this new machine will not adventure it rashly where it may be destroyed, but will prefer when in doubt to act prudently and cautiously, not advancing except where the course is clear. W's. then, are the obligations of the ; Chinese and Japanese Governments in this crisis? Both are signatories of the Kellogg Treaty for the outlawry of war, and have solemnly agreed that the settlement or solution of all disputes and conflicts, of whatever kind they may be, between them, shall never be sought except by peaceful means. In 1928, years after the formation of the League of Nations, the Kellogg Treaty, for the Renunciation of War, which is called also the Pact of Paris, was ratified by all the States of the world. [A printed card setting out the terms of the Treaty is posted up in every post office throughout New Zealand.] It is one of the shortest treaties in existence, and there can be no doubt about its plain meaning. It supplements the Covenant of the League of Nations and is binding at the present moment between Japan and China. Clause 1 reads as follows: "The high contracting parties solemnly declare in the names of their. respective peoples that they condemn recourse to war for the solution of international controversies, and renounce it as an instrument of national policy in their relations to. others." Both (Concluded ‘on page 23.)

Can the League save Shanghai? | (Continued from page 8.)

China and J apan when they joined the League of Nations, gave equally soln undertakings not to resort to war. "Open and successful defiance of the League would undoubtedly destroy eenacaver hopes -have been built. uposs i Up to date, neither Japan nor China has actually declared war. Such a declaration would represent a formal and open repudiation of treaty obligations, and an act of defiancé to all peaceful opinion throughout the world. Neither Power has yet seen fit to take this last irrevocable step. If the League of Nations has done nothing else, it has provided a- rallying point for those forces in the world which condemn war. The question is whether these forces will prevail. Failure is bound to affect in yarying degrees the lives of every one of us, even in New Zealand-success on the other hand will mark a great advance toward security. It, must not be supposed that the problems confronting the Chinese and Japanese Governments are capable of simple statement. I can only mention a few points which indicate the problems which each country is now facing. The Chinese say that the Japanese have pursued a well-planned policy of penetration in Manchuria, and that the Japanese soldiers have deliberately and on numerous occasions provoked hostilities. The Chinese say that they will abide unreservedly by the. decisions of the League of Nations. and will give —

unby undertaking to carry out any instructions the League might give. The Japanese say that even if the Chinese Government gave such undertakings the Chinese soldiery would not respect the instructions of their own Govern-ment-in other words they say thut the Chinese Government cannot control their own soldiery and their own population. The Japanese say that the Chinese haye repeatedly broken the understandings with Japan relating to Man-churia-that the Chinese Government has invited trouble by encouraging 9 boycott in China of Japanese goods, causing grave unemployment in Japan. It is unnecessary for us to enter into the rights and wrongs of the dispute between Japan and China. What we are concerned with at the moment is the position of the League of Nations. Briefly, the league’s case against Japan is that the Japanese. have constituted themselves judges in their own cause, instead of using the machinery of the league. The chief concern of the’ Western world is the evasion by Japan of her obligations to us under. the League Covenant-and the Kellog Pact-the chief obligation . being not to go to war. One clear fact is

that Japan in the last few weeks has occupied Chinese territory greater in. extent that the British. Isles. The powers of the League -of Nations for punishing a state which goes to war are contained in the famous 16th elause or article, as it is called, of the League Covenant. Article 16 provides that a state which resorts to. war, in breach of the Covenant, shall be treated as being at war -with all the other members of the league, which thereupon must sever all trade and financial relations with the covenantbreaking state. Mutual support is to be given against the aggressor, and, in addition to economic pressure, military pressure may be used. Now Great Britain and the United States of America have never been very favourable to Article 16. -Great Britain agreed to the article ‘with reluctance, and the United States has refused to join the League of .Nations partly because of the existence of this article. The British and American Governments look upon the league as au instrument to be used to pacify and unite peoples, rather than as an instrument of punishment. This view is a practical one. The League of Nations is no stronger than the public support which it can command. Britain has always seen that if and when Article 16 is applied, heavy burdens would fall upon her, and it is doubtful whether public opinion in Britain would countenance a war of punishment, even in a just cause, Some of the less responsible Wnglish "newspapers, with large daily circulations, have concealed and distorted the facts as to the Far Hastern situation. and have. demanded that Britaiu should not support.the League of Nations even in the limited action it has taken. One newspaper even con-. demned the comparatively trifling: ex~pense of sending Sir John Simon to the meetings of the League Council. Two of these journals which have vonsistently attacked the League of Nations since jts formation are endeavouring to stir up -public. opinion in Bugland against the League. They may or may not be justified in what they are doing, but I merely state’ the fact to show that public opinion in England is not yet overwhelmingly behind the League. ‘When people say, why doesn’t the League of Nations act, they are really thinking, why doesn’t the League take drastic steps, even to the extent of going to war? The answer is that the League dare not become jnvolyed in this way without the whole-

hearted. public support which would be .essential to successful ‘action, The League of Nations can advise, :it ‘can warn. it ean judge-but it. will. never threaten. where it cannot compel. One can only state the problem in the form of questions, the atiswers to which are. obscure,. The problem resolyes. itself along these lines: ‘Can the League remain inactive and still retain its influence in the world?. If an Asiatic Power successfully defies the League Council, which is essehtially Buropean, what effect would. this successful defiance have upon the peoples of Asia? What will the United States do if the balance of power in the Pacific is radically changéd? Is it better for the League to lose prestige rather than for Japan to feel insulted by the European Powers? If the League goes no further, will the Chinese people turn upon their own rulers and destroy: them, on the ground that they have.relied upon treaties and moral forces ‘rather than upon military preparation? Winally, I wish. to stress this ‘point for the consideration of each one of you: The British Empire is a. member of the League of Nations. What do you, as British citizens, think about the honourable obligations which ‘you have entered into under the Covenant of the League?