The Press SATURDAY, APRIL 7, 1934. Hope for the Disarmament Conference

Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21133, 7 April 1934, Page 12

The Press SATURDAY, APRIL 7, 1934. Hope for the Disarmament Conference

The last week has produced the most hopeful development in the disarmament negotiations for many months. It is reported, apparently on good authority, that the British Government is willing to join in an agreement to provide sanctions for enforcing any disarmament convention that may become operative; and this change of front is approved, not merely by Liberal newspapers such as the " Manchester Guardian " and the '■News-Chronicle," but also by " The Times." Those who have watched the attitude of ''The "Times" towards the problems of international government and know how sternly it has opposed all previous attempts to bind Great Britain to anything more than co-operation and consultation in the settlement of international disputes will realise that the change in its views is profoundly significant. For in such matters the opinion of "The " Times" is usually the opinion of the great majority of middle-class Englishmen. It is important to notice, however, that "The Times" and presumably the British Government is of the same mind—insists that a distinction must be drawn between guarantees of what the French Government understands by "security" and guarantees of a disarmament convention. For France, security means primarily the maintenance of the territorial status quo established by the peace treaties. The British public has never regarded the peace treaties as sacred and inclines more and more to the view that their revision by collective action among the powers is the only alternative to another European war. It feels, moreover, that by signing the Locarno agreements Great Britain went Jar enough, and perhaps too far, towards relieving France's anxieties over her Rhine frontier. Besides being unwilling further to guarantee the post-war settlement, the British Government is also unwilling, according to the " Daily Telc- •' graph," " to acquiesce in automatic ■' sanctions arising from an arbit- •' rary definition of an aggressor." That also is understandable and excusable. So far all attempts to produce a satisfactory definition of an aggressor have failed; and in any case it is arguable that the machinery of international government is still in such a rudimentary stage of development that an attempt to provide sanctions against any and every aggressor is certain to fail. But the British Government is willing, it appears, to assist in the establishment of an international authority to supervise the carrying out of a disarmament convention; and it is willing to assist in applying military sanctions against a state which can be shown to have violated the convention. There is thus a possibility that France's main objection to the British draft convention will be overcome. It is, of course, no more than a possibility. The French Government's most recent note on the subject suggests that it is less anxious to save the Disarmament Conference than to throw the responsibility for its failure on some other power.