LEAGUE SANCTIONS

Dominion, Volume 28, Issue 285, 29 August 1935, Page 10

LEAGUE SANCTIONS

Dispute Between Italy and Abyssinia

DOES IT MEAN WAR?

Discussion by League of

Nations Union

The present state of international affairs was reflected in a series of remits introduced at tiie annual conference of the New Zealand League of Nations Union meeting in Wellington yesterday, with respect to possible lines of action in the event of members of ihe League ignoring their obligations under the covenant. In some cases the remits had specific reference to the Italo-Abyssinian dlspute. Tiie following remits were presented :—

"That tlip conference regrets the increasing tendency of States, members of the League of Nations, to ignore their obligations under the covenant ami urges the New Zealand Government to offer uncomprising opposition in the Assembly of the League to any breach of these obligations as the only alternative to a reversion to competitive armaments and a drift toward war.” —(Auckland.) “That we urge the Government of New Zealand to use its influence with the British Government in support of the efforts now being made to prevent Italy from attacking Abyssinia in disregard of th? covenant of the League and of the Pact of Paris.”—(Gisborne.) The Dunedin branch moved the adoption as a remit of the following resolutions by the general council of the League of Nations Union: — “The general council of the League of Nations Union records its conviction that the present sense of international insecurity arises largely from doubts whether the covenant provisions’for the preservation of peace will be used effectively. “The council would therefore welcome an authoritative statement from his Majesty’s Government as to the powers it possesses to apply, without special legislation, the measures prescribed in Article XVI of the covenant, and urges that if any further powers are found to be necessary they should be acquired without delay.

"The general council of the League of Nations Union, being convinced that little further progress will be made by the Disarmament Conference unless more definite guarantees of security can be given and taken, urges H.M. Government to open conversations with the other Powers which are signatories of the Pact of Paris with a view to arriving at an agreement to set up machinery (1) immediately to bring into progressive effect diplomat.ic’and economic sanctions on the lines of those laid down in Article 16 of the covenant and (2) to stop the import of munitions of war of every kind to the aggressor nation.”

“Weakens League's Case.” The Hon. T. Bloodworth. M.L.C., moving the Auckland remit, said be did not think there would be much room for difference of opinion concerning it. Mr. C. McKenzie (Pahiatua) said he opposed the remit as the wording of it weakened the League's case. Rev. J. A. Allan (Christchurch) said it was one of the most important matters to be considered by the conference. He put the following motion to the meeting:— “That the conference trusts the dispute between Italy and Abyssinia will be settled peacefully in accordance with international law as embodied in the covenant and by the procedure of the League of Nations.” Mr. Bloodworth said the Auckland remit was drawn up in general terms while the discussion had centred round the Italo-Abyssinian question. Other people had broken the covenant as well as Italy. Miss E. G. Middleton (Otago) thought the Christchurch suggestion was much superior to any of the others and supported it.

“Not Nearly Strong Enough.” Mr. McKenzie felt the statement was not anywhere nearly strong enough. It was time our Government had declared itself in support of the British Government even to the extent of applying sanctions. The Very Rev. Dr. J. Gibb (president emeritus): Does that mean world war? Mr. McKenzie: “World war, possibly. If Italy goes to war we must be prepared to fight for peace.” he said. If the world united against Italy site would have no chance.

The issue, Mr. Allan said, was whether the conference should or should not; say to the Government, “Go ahead with the sanctions.”

Referred to Committee.

Mr. W. B. Matheson (Wellington) said it would be judicial and wise to omit the mention of any two countries’ names. It was a matter of principle. The remits were referred to a committee comprising Hon. T. Bloodworth, Messrs. T. Todd, C. McKenzie, and the Rev. J. A. Allan.

The committee will report to-day, when there will be further consideration of the question.