The Dominion MONDAY, JANUARY 18, 1926. COMING INTO LINE

Dominion, Volume 19, Issue 96, 18 January 1926, Page 6

The Dominion MONDAY, JANUARY 18, 1926. COMING INTO LINE

A recent cablegram from Washington stated that a featuic of the Senate debate on the World Court resolution was “a more or less open advocacy by some Senators that the United States should join the League of Nations.” It might be unwise to build any hopes on this development so far as the immediate outlook is concerned. The possibility, indeed, cannot be overlooked that a premature attempt to bring the United States into the League might be turned to account for their owji ends by American statesmen and politicians who oppose even adhesion to the World Court. On the other hand, the United States for several years past has been making steady though gradual progress towards closer cooperation with other nations in world affairs. It seems likely that if this progress continues and is not interrupted by injudicious attempts to force the pace, America eventually will find herself in a position hardly to be distinguished from actual membership of the League. & Thc latest move in this direction is reported to-day, and it is of some importance and significance. The United States Government has informed the League of Nations Secretariat that it is ready, to communicate all treaties and international agreements into which it enters. These treaties may be published in the League’s list, but on the understanding that they are not to be formally registered, as the United States is not a member of the League. For practical purposes this reservation obviously is much less important than the fact that America is falling into line, with the nations which are members of the League where the publication of treaties is concerned. At the same time, this step towards fuller international cooperation derives additional significance from the time at which it is taken. The circumstances plainly suggest that the American. Government regards the outcome of the Senate debate on adhesion to the World Court as a foregone conclusion. Additional weight is wiven also to an opinion that the United States is prepared to take an active part in the conference on the further limitation of armaments for which plans are now being laid. Such a disposition on America’s part is all the more to be desired since it is clear that an effective agreement on armament limitation that is to say, an agreement which will really lighten the burdens of national defence and do away with provocative competition in armaments —will not be reached easily. It is now self-evident that the step in this direction taken at the Washington Conference was short and inconclusive. Looking only at naval warfare, the problem of limiting the construction of submarines and surface cruisers of not more than ten thousand tons is still untouched. So also is that of regulating the construction of aircraft, which are perhaps already entitled to rank as the most formidable instruments of warfare yet invented. Each nation is apt to look at these problems from its own standpoint, and even Britain and the’United States may not be able to bring their views on the limitation of armaments into complete harmony. Recent discussion has done a good deal, however, to point the way to practical co-operation between the English-speaking nations in promoting world peace. This may be said to some extent even of the observations of American critics who find fault with Britain’s attitude.

Not long ago, for instance, the New York World declared in an editorial that if the British were in earnest about the abolition of the submarine they would have to prepare to surrender their power to blockade Continental Powers. The American newspaper, after developing this theme, went on to contend that if the submarine were to be abolished, Britain and America would have to offer Continental Powers an equivalent security against blockade.

The solution will be found (the IFor/rf added) by establishing, international institutions and international laws with interlacing guarantees which will provide a substitute lor war and the arbitrary use of force. I

This, of course, is essentially the standpoint of Britain and other countries which arc members of the League of Nations. There cannot be any doubt that in the extent to which America approaches the same standpoint—and she appears to be making some progress in that direction —the indivisible problem of limiting armaments and safeguarding the peace of the world will be made easier of solution.