AMERICA WILL JOIN

Evening Post, Volume CVI, Issue 6, 7 July 1923, Page 9

AMERICA WILL JOIN

DESPITE ALTERNATE PROPOSALS LORD ROBERT CECIL'S VIEW ii OUTLAWRY OF ,WAR ■" SCHEME. (By Lord Robert Cecil.'—Copyright.) (No. 5.) • Lord Robert Cecil, who has since been appointed Lord Privy Seal, recently visited America on behalf of tlie British Government, with a view to enlisting sympathy for the League of Nations. Immediately upon hisreturn to London he set' down his impressions of America's attitude to the League. The articles, - which will be published exclusively in "The Evenine Post," throw an, inter- ■ estin<j light upon current American opinion. / A proposal that is commonly put forward now in- the United States is what is called the outlawry of.war. Senator Borah is one of the chief exponents of this proposal. As I understand it, it means in the first place a solemn declaration by all civilised countries that any war is an international crime. The supporters of the doctrine do not believe that that in itself would have any direct effect, but they think that its indirect and psychological effect would be very considerable. They would probably agree that wax- to be a crime must bo aggressive war. Self-defence is as permissible in international affairs as it is for an individual. Even so, there seems to be some difficulties -which require consideration. Are "the proposers of this scheme prepared to say that every conceivable aggressive war is.an international crime? I am rather inclined to say I would go so far as that myself, but I have some doubts whether American opinion would agree with me. VARIOUS SORTS OF WAR. For instance, take the War of Independence. That in itaelf was not international, but was in the nature of an insurrection, and would therefore be, no doubt, excluded from any condemnation of international war. But what about Lafayette? His action was a case of a foreign Power taking part in internal hostilities, and therefore waging war against one of the parties to such hostilities. It is difficult to see how it can be described otherwise, than an aggressive war. To meet this difficulty one of the supporters of the doctrine suggested that you might make an exception with regard to wars of liberation. But that seems to me a very hazardous line to take. To American sentiment wars of liberation are naturally very sacred. In other countries warlike operations of a different character are equally sacredi Suppose a nation, threatened by attack from a more powerful nation than herself, thinks that she will best protect herself by striking before her enemy is ready. That would be an aggressive war, though its object might be ultimately defence, which, indeed, is the justification put forward for almost every war of recent times. I venture, 'therefore, to think that if you are to adopt outlawry of war as a principle at all it must be without any exception other than. sucfi-as will apply, to all wars equally. For instance, it may be possible to say that a war should only be deemed an aggressive war ■if the aggressor is not ready to submit-his dispute to some international tribunal for a settlement. That follows_the line of thought somewhat modified, of Article XV., -which requires nations to submit their disputes tr. discussion before resorting to hostilities. Beyond this general condemnation 01 aggressive war the adherents of outlawry of war recommend the establishment of an international Court, with universal compulsory jurisdiction, explaining however, that the decisions of the Court are to be enforced by public opinion and not by military action. With that part of their scheme I have already incidentally dealt when dealing with the objection to the acceptance by America of the Permanent Court of International Justice. YET ANOTHER SCHEME. A third proposal • was made while I was in America, which seemed to me very interesting. The Senator had been one of the strongest opponents of the League ln 1920, believing that it was in the. nature of a sunper-State, and conceiving that its decisions were to be enforced by armed action. He was good enough to read what I had said on the subject of the League and recognised that the conception of the League so' put forward was very different from that to which he had raised objection in 1920. He was not tZ e nfcV° nVlnCed that »y-interpret.: turn of. the covenant was the right one. i W Ser-"; tiy s Peak«g> I made no attempt to interpret the covenant itselftuX6^ T^ ed hat the LeaS"s actually did. This mode of exposition, acceptable enough to a British mind, is !f" ««epteWo- to Americans trained ■- %&&£&£ tlleil C°nStitUtioU The Senator however, while adhering to h.s view that my interpretation of the covenant was. not strictly sustainable said _m a public speech that if the League Jiew definitely deprived of all powers to enforce its decision by military means and merely consisted of an organised system ol international conferences for the discussion of world problems and the promotion of international-co-opera-tion, he would see very much less objection to it Following his lead, the ;>lew Republic," a. great advocate of the outlawry of war theory, added'to' the usual programme of that school which I have already described, a proposition that, provided Europe showed a real desire for peace, the United States might "join the League on the understanding that it would not bo reauired to take part in any military action. ALL A LITTLE VAGUE. So far the proposals are a little vague it-is not quite certain whether Senator ±"egper suggests an alteration of the covenant or entry by the United States into only some of the obligations of the covenant, whether by way & reservations -or as a kind of associate member of the League. In any case the proposal seoms to me one of very groat interest and value. As T understand it, Ai-ticlo X. does not, in effect, involve the use of ■force. Article XVI. does, and it is unquestionably a very useful and important article, and may become more so in the future. LEAGUE POWER INCREASING. 1 came away from America as convinced as I was before I went that sooner or later- the United States . would join the League in some form or other. In my view the League is a live organism gradually increasing in power and authority. - - I cannot believe that anyone who has attended the three assemblies of tha League will doubt this. The League is a far- strouger body than it was* three ysars ago. The only thing that is holding- it beck at thg moment is the r»-

hictance of France to submit its difficulties with Germany to the League. If the French Government were ready to take that course, as we were ready to take it with regard to our dispute with Turkey about Mosul, the authority of the League would be definitely established. In any case, lam convinced that the League is bound to go on, and is bound to grow in strength. In process of time it will therefore inevitably absorb all the mort important international questions. It will became the sole international authority in Europe and the world. All countries desiring to take part in international affairs will have to use the League machinery for that purpose, for there will be no other of importance.

To my mind, therefore, it is certain that sooner.or later the United States will join the League, nnd the only question is when? From her point of view, and from the point of view of the rest of the world, it is much to be hoped that she will join it soon enough to mould the League according to American ideas, for I believe ideas of America on international affairs are, broadly speaking, sound-, and perhaps sounder than those of any other country. She looks at them with greater, impartiality, less hampered by bad traditions, more genuinely convinced that war is a senseless method of settling international disputes. But the decision as to her entry is evidently entirely for herself. I do not regret having attempted to furnish her people with facts which will enable them to come to an unbiased decision. I think that was a reasonable and legitimate thing to do, but it would be a thousand pities if the attention of the rest of he world were diverted from the main task of .building up the League to be a great instrument of international peace and progress by perpetually looking over their shoulders to sop what America is doing. ' ■