FOREIGN POLICY

Dominion, Volume 31, Issue 296, 10 September 1938, Page 10 (Supplement)

FOREIGN POLICY

International Law Must Come First

CHURCHMEN’S PROTEST A manifesto on the moral basis of foreign policy and rearmament was issued recently in England over the names of a number of prominent churchmen, including the Archbishop of York. Dr. Temple. It declares that the maintenance of international law must, on moral grounds, come first, and quotes the bombing of British ships iu Spanish harbours as a case where international law is being broken. The Government, it argues, should take action to check these outrages, “not so much in defence of British interests as iu defence of law.”

The statement was sent out on behalf of the following:—

The Archbishop of York; the Bishops of Bath and Wells, Bristol, Carlisle, Chelmsford, Derby, Hover, Lichfield, St. Asaph, Southwark, and Southwell; the Deans of Chichester and Exeter; the Provost of Wakefield; the Rector of Birmingham.

League Members’ Failures.

The following is the text of the mani festo

“We who sign this statement represent a great multitude who have been rendered anxious about the moral basis of foreign policy and rearmament, as a result of the recent trend of events. It is to many people far less evident than it was three years ago on what moral principles foreign policy should be based, and in what conditions it may be justifiable to have recourse to armed force.

“We are persuaded that the deterioration in this sphere, which is universally acknowledged, is due to the failure to stand by principles, which they professed, on the part of the States members of the League of Nations at various critical pointsj we mention two —the failure to take any kind of effectual action on the Lytton Report after the invasion of Manchuria, and the holding up of sanctions in the case of Abyssinia at the point where they might have begun to be effective; in both cases our own country had a large measure of responsibility.

“At present we are confronted with situations in China and in Spain which give rise to grave misgivings, and all are aware that similar situations may arise at any time in Central Europe. “We desire, therefore, to affirm that the supreme goal of foreign policy should be the establishment and maintenance of international law. It seems to be assumed that our country would resort to war in self-defence, which is generally understood to include defence of the territorial integrity of the British Empire; from that we do not dissent, though we should wish the decision whether a causus belli exists to rest with an impartial authority, unless a territorial aggression has actually taken place. ■ Territory and Law. “But we wish to affirm with all possible emphasis that there is clearer moral justification for the use of armed force in defence of international law’ than for a war of the old type in defence of territorial possessions or economic interests. And we are far from ; satisfied that this order of moral prior- ; ity is universally accepted by our fel-low-citizens or by the Government. “Several examples might be given of what we mean. The continued wars | in China and Spain, accompanied as ■ they are by the most appalling suffer- ;: ing of the civilian population, includ- ! ing women and children, constitute i clear breaches of both law and moral- ; ity. Perhaps the clearest instance of a single factor to which both national : interests and international law are applicable is the bombing of British ships I in Spanish harbours. Those ships are £ acting lawfully and the attacks on them are unlawful. Not so much in 11 defence of British interests as in de- I fence of law’, we hold that the Gov- , eminent should take effectual action to if check these outrages and face consid- I erable risk with that object. We have I no competence to suggest how this ■ should be done, but are encouraged by i the success of the Nyon Agreement to i believe that the difficulties are not I insuperable and that a firm stand for I

moral principle would not necessarily involve war. “There is a real moral case for a repdif tion of the use of armed force ..Itogether; but our country has not been persuaded that it is sound. There is no moral case for building and maintaining armaments without clear moral principles to direct their use. We are anxious lest the recent trend of events should develop into a drift away from all moral principles and results in an acceptance < f sheer expediency as the guide of our action. “We recognise the paramount obligation of avoiding general war, if that can be done without gross betrayal of ■ rinciple: but we contend that an even greater evil is involved in international anarchy, which would, moreover, almost inevitably lead to general war. "IVe desir- therefore, to reiterate our conviction that th-' maintenance of international law must, on moral grounds, take precedence of any national inte.ests in the direction of foreign policy and should be its supreme goal.

“Other points follow from this, including revision of the existing international law and the securing of fair ace t raw materials. But of all claims the authority of international law stands first.”