CONDEMNATION OF THE SOVIET

Press, Volume LXXV, Issue 22894, 15 December 1939, Page 11

CONDEMNATION OF THE SOVIET

Recommendation To The League

EXPULSION HELD ALMOST CERTAIN

!xmrrto pb*ss association — co-tbight.) (Received December 1L 11 p.m.) LONDON. December 1 I

Drawn up after a long debate by a sub-committee consisting of representatives of Bolivia. France. Portugal, Britain, and Sweden, the following recommendation has been adopted by the Russian-Finnish committee for submission to the Assembly of the League of Nations to-day: “The Assembly finds that the Soviet by its act of aggression against Finland failed in its special political agreement with Finland, and violated the Pact of Paris and also Article XII of the League CovenanL “The Soviet also denounced without justification the 1932 Non-Aggression Treaty. “The Assembly therefore condemns the Soviet action against Finland and addresses a pressing appeal to every member to furnish Finland with all possible material and humanitarian assistance, and to abstain from all action that might weaken Finland's powers of resistance. ‘Tt authorises the Secretary-General (M. Avenol) to lend the League’s technical services for Finland's assistance, and authorises the Secretary-General to consult non-member States with a view to future eventual collaboration.”

The recommendations condemning- the Soviet which were adopted by the Russian-Finnish committee of the Assembly must pass two more stages before they can be enforced—the Assembly debate and then deliberation by the Council on possible means of their applica- ~ tion. The recommendations do not ' specifically demand Russia’s expulsion, but British, French, and Russian spokesmen agreed that that was almost certain. The Finnish delegate (Dr. Holsti), commenting on the rec -nnaendations, said: “It would mean all or nothing. We shall wait and see.” Dr. Wellington Koo, the Chinese delegate, when he saw the extent of the assistance promised to Finland, said: “China got nothing like that.” The Argentine delegate (Senor Freyre) told the Assembly that unless Russia were ejected, the Argentine would resign from the League. Demanding the application of Paragraph 4 of Article XVI of the Covenant, he declared: “The question is whether we will continue to allow the perpetrator of this act of aggression to sit among us. My Government considers this impossible. “Finland is not the first member State unjustifiably attacked, but the case is attended by such circumstances as compel my Government to pass the most severe judgment. The aggressor denied that she was at war, disdaining even the outward form of legality and therefore placing herself outside the Covenant. “We need no longer be restrained by a desire to act cautiously and weigh our responsibilities with the object of preserving peace. We are confronted by a state of war.” He said the League faced a decision concerning its life or death. The League had lost its coercive force, but was still capable of a gesture against those who resorted to force, and this it could not refuse to make unless it were prepared to resign its functions in a spirit of suicidal defeat. Russia's invasion constituted an insult to every member of the League. Because of the League’s recent weakness, there had grown up a tacit agreement to refrain from trusting it with important political activity. Not even Poland’s agony ruffled_ the League, although it was the origin of the conflagration. “If we wish to spare the world from the abyss opening before it, if we desire .the rebirth of international law, it behoves us to discard material considerations, and rally the moral forces which have fallen into oblivion. “By refusing to attend the League’s deliberations, the Soviet failed in one of the most essential responsibilities under the League for the guarantee of peace and security of nations. The Soviet acted as though the Council and the Assembly did not exist, as far as the Soviet was concerned. By attempting to justify its refusal by alleging that the League had established relations with a fictitious Government, the Soviet was not only guilty of violating one of its responsibilities under the Covenant, but placed itself outside the Covenant.” Argentine’s proposal was referred to the committee without debate. The Moscow radio station, in a broadcast, attacked the League, and thus, for the first time, the Russian people were aware of the breach. It was claimed that the Finnish appeal was full of lies, and Britain and France -were also attacked. The radio also claimed that the method of election of the League's Russian-Finnish committee was “a British and French manoeuvre” carried out by carefully-selected anti-Soviet representatives of countries dependent on British and French capital.

NEW SWEDISH CABINET

EXCLUSION OF FORMER FOREIGN MINISTER EXPLANATION BY PRIME MINISTER (TTiriTKD PRESS tSSOCUKOI COPTRIGST^S (Received December 15, 12.25 a_GQ.) STOCKHOLM. December 14In a statement explaining the omission of the former Foreign Minister (Mr R. J. Sandler) from the new Swedish Cabinet, the Prime Minister (Mr Hansson) said that he bad disagreed with Mr Sandler over the fortification of the Aalaad Islands. Sweden's foreign policy, he added, would be unchanged. It was officially stated in Stockholm that Mr Sandler tendered his resignation on December 2. a day before the German attacks on mia began. The new Cabinet does not favour direct intervention in Finland, and it has had a lukewarm reception from the Swedish newspapers. The Government, in a statement, declared: "We will give Finland human and material help, which has already spontaneously appeared, but will maintain neutrality This is interpreted to mean that the Government will confirm the assistance of ambulances and relief funds, and is not hindering private unofficial help of other kinds. Mr Hansson, in a broadcast, said: “The Cabinet reshuffle does not mean a change in Sweden’s course."

VALUE OF CONVOY SYSTEM

I APPRECIATION BY NEUTRALS 1 ! STRONG RESENTMENT BY I GERMANY ! j official ; RUGBY, December 13 | The regular and successful working of the convoy system to which the First Lord of the Admiralty (Mr Winston Churchill) recently referred, continues to ensure with little diminution the maintenance of Britain's sea-borne trade. The smoothness with which the system | operates under the protection of J powerful units of the British Navy is such that the achievement attracts but little attention in the daily press. Shipping circles of neutrals, however. appreciate the significance of ; this unsensationai evidence of the strength of the British Xavy. That the safe arrival in convoy of hun- ' dreds of British and also neutral , vessels at their destination hat ; equally impressed Germany is shown iby the fruitless efforts of German ; propaganda to attempt to prove to j neutral shipowners that the convoy ; system is unsafe for their vessels The real purpose of this propa- : ganda is. however, well understood. ; for unaccompanied snips provide an easier mark for the torpedoes cf German submarines, which hesitate to risk the depth charges and other defensive weapons of vessels escort - I ing the convoy. The enemy’s inilwi-riwipat* methods of sutmasriise warfsre -rs.— evitably claim occasional victims and, in view of the difficulties which merchant vessels experience in maintaining convoy formation in thick weather or in manoeuvring in ! roadsteads congested by heavy ar- ; rivals, accidents are from time to , time unavoidable. It is increasingly clear that Ger- ' many strongly resents the resort by j neutrals to the precautions forced i on them, including the chartering a£ : ships to the British Government.'