EMPIRE VIEWS

Auckland Star, Volume LXXVI, Issue 85, 11 April 1945, Page 5

EMPIRE VIEWS

WORLD SECURITY London Talks Indicate Certain Divergencies N.Z.P.A. Special Correspondent Rec. 11.30 a.m. LONDON, April 10. A mutual exchange of views at the Commonwealth Conference, without any hard and fast decisions being reached, has indicated that the British nations hold varying opinions on the future of world security and it is understood that different attitudes may be adopted at San Francisco. Briefly, it would appear that the difference lies in the British nations' opinions regarding the proposed duties that should be placed on the big Powers. Australia, for instance, considers that the security council, if constituted as suggested by the Dumbarton Oaks proposals, would hold too much power. Australia feels that a judicial commission should work parallel with this council and that disputes should be submitted to it for arbitration. In the event of failure to achieve agreement on recommendations made by the commission the questions in dispute should then be referred to the security council for action. New Zealand Viewpoint The New Zealand view is that too little authority is vested in the assembly and too much with the council. The assembly should have a greater voice in helping to decide when and where action should be taken. More protection for the views of middle and small Powers is advocated. Canada maintains that there should be representation on the security council of the middle Powers like herself, Australia, the Netherlands and Brazil, who have made considerable contributions to the war effort and whose work toward peace may be expected to be measured in the same terms. All these viewpoints have much in common. Britain and South Africa, however, take a different stand. This is that only the big Powers are able to keep and maintain peace, or alternatively to make world wars. It is felt, therefore, that the smaller Powers should make sacrifices, since they cannot be classed as big Powers in the matter of executing their responsibilities. Russia and America This is more in accordance with the views of Russia and America, but at the same time Britain is prepared to accept an adjustment, which would recognise the rights of smaller Powers if by so doing machinery to maintain peace would be strengthened. The main principles of the Dumbarton Oaks proposals are stated to be generally accepted by the conference and the primary duties of the Great Powers are recognised. Bat it is felt by Australia, New Zealand and that some check should be kept on any possible tendency of the big Powers to disregard the views of or override the smaller Powers. It is recognised that the big Powers, have a far greater responsibility for making or breaking the peace, but that there are certain weaknesses in the Dumbarton Oaks proposals which might be overcome as a result of suggesf tions arising ort of the London discus pns.