THE EMPIRE

Evening Post, Volume CVII, Issue 82, 5 April 1924, Page 7

THE EMPIRE

AND FOREIGN POLIGY,

ANGLO-AMERICAN ASSOCIATION

SUGGESTED RECONSTRUCTION,

(rsqji oub own correstondbkt.lS

LONDON, 14th February^

In the current number of "The Empire Review" Mr. Richard Jebb, who has to his credit a number of important publications on Colonial and Imperial matters, deals with several' unusual and in: teresting aspects of the relationship between the Dominions and Britain^ He takes as his text an excerpt from the report of the recent Imperial Conference: "There was a full accord that the League should be" given the unabated support of all the British members of the League as a valuable instrument of international peace and the sole available organ for the harmonious regulation of many international affairs."

Nothing could illustrate more strikingly, he says, the new phase of the British Empire than the fact that the two sessions of the Imperial Conference which have taken place since the war, have been dominated by discussions of foriegn policy. "In 1923," the writer goes on to say, "the assistance o£ the tjnited States was sought as the means to a solution of the Franco-British deadlock on the Ruhr and Reparations, and the American Government quickly responded by making a certain proposal, whicli depended on France's concurrence. That the proposal fell through is. immaterial at. present. We need only note that, twice in succession the-meeting of the Imperial Conference has occasioned a definite attempt at co-operation between the British Empire and the United States for securing the peace of the world; and that the American Government is reluctant to- intervene in Europe' unless the ex-Allies, at least, are already in agreement. Meanwhile, the League of Nations, which was'founded expressly in order to promote world-peace, has disappointed'the za'al of its supporters. They themselves attribute its obvious weakness mainly to the abstention of the United States. But the Americans in general reply that they will never consent to" becoming continually entangled in the internal quarrels of Europe, as membership of the League-is seen toi involve. ■

DOMINION'S' IDEALISM.

"Considering together the disappointment of the League of Nations and. the' manifest instinct of the United States and the British Empire to work in conjunction' for world-peace, one may suggest, that the time has1 come for both the partisans and the critics of the League to' revise their ideas. In particular, this appeal may be made to the younger Britannic nations, which have always been among the most afdent supporters of , 'the League. Their enthusiasm springs from a fine idealism 'which, whether v misdirected or not, •is surely ,bne of the most encouraging facts for a 'world depressed-by baffled hopes."

The •writer points^ out that there has' been a process of local grouping in the Imperial Conference which has made ■it^a workable institution by (a) substituting a few big memberships for a .host of petty memberships, and'(b)''eliminating, inter-provincial disputes, which now fall to "be adjusted by the '.'regional" authority, i.e., the national Government in Canada,...Australia,\South Africa, or India. , .

An essential difference between the, League of Nations and the Britannic League is that the latter has steadfastly refused to adopt any "covenant," despite pressure from two opposite sehocL'.. The centralists have urged it to adopt a federal covenant;'the extreme autonomists have urged it to issue a declaration of rights. The object of the one school was to commit the partner States to certain definite obligations; and the object of the other to release them from any undefined obligations. But the Imperial Conference lias prudently declined to countenance either' proposal; preferring to let the Britannic partnership 'gradually adapt itself, for better or worse, to the changing needs or moods of its component peoples. If that is its theoretical weakness, it has equally proved to be, so far 3 _ its practical, strength. . : .

AMERICA'S MAIN OBJECTION.

- "Is it not possible, even probable, that the real hope for a political brotherhood of man lies in the application of these same two principles —regional association^ and abstention from" covenantto the^wider problem of a world organisation?/ At any rate, we can connect the obvious weaknesses of the existing League with its disregard of those two principles. If Europe were a 'regional' association,' sending as such a single de-. legation to the woyld conference, America's main objection to joining up would vanish at once because the internal disputes of Europe would lie outside the purview of the League, just as Canada's intcrprovincial disputes do ■ not concern the Imperial Conference. And if there were no covenant, there could be no occasion for members to scold another member, with impotent virulence, for alleged breach of covenantI,' as'was lately witnessed at.Geneva. It is plainly a mis-: take to embody in a formal contract obligations which, owing to the unreasqfnable nature of the obligations themselves,' the parties are unlikely to fulfil. Jn international affairs the more hopeful way isthat oE the Imperial Conference, which defines by simple resolution the measure of agreement temporarily obtainable on "a .particular ' question at the particular time. In either case the_ execution is ultimately enforceable by public opinion only. ■ ..■■'■ INFORMAL ASSOCIATION WITH UNITED STATES. "By this line of reasoning we are led to the conclusion that the British Empire ought to withdraw from the present League of Nations—which should be encouraged to regard itself as an institu-' tion concerned primarily with the inter-, nal unity of Europe—and seek to develop an informal association with 'the United States in a periodical, non-coven-anted conference, which might very well follow the regular sessions of the Imperial Conference, now likely to be held biennially. Thus would be formed the nucleus of the real, practical, world association; comprising only large units, whether unitary like the United States or loose partnerships like the British Empire.' unhampered by. any covenant. 'Empty chairs' would await United Europe, South America, and Eastern Asia.; The fact, already notqd, that twice in succession the Imperial Conference has been glad to welcome a timely overture from Washington suggests that here we • have no vague speculation, but a practical way of working towards the great ideal which the League of Nations was bound to disappoint, owing to the radical defects of its own organisation.." ■ . A CURIOUS POSITION.. The British Empire, the writer points out. is represented at Geneva by British representatives, Britain individually not being a .member at all. "This curious position ia inconsistent wjlb, Jh* claig^of Jhv jaflffilsioefe^tt

equality of states with Britain. Also, it has some practical disadvantages, whicU have been recognised to fJ"» extent that on all large political issues the Dominions endeavour to act in concert with Britain. But they contirme to assert separata policies, sometimes, on. minor questions. Let us contemplate a withdrawal of the British Empire from the' League. ,The several Dominions would still be members. It would remain open to General Smuts, for example, to exert the weight of South Africa against the policy of France. Bnt there would be no real danger, as now, of war.being provoked; because General Smuts could not appeai to be speaking for the Empire and, in any case, without the British Empire the League would be forced to recognise its real limitations. It could no longer deceive itself with the pretence of Being final arbiter the world, or even of Europe. ■ it has, however; already proved d, useful, if not indispensable, agency for international aid to distressed States; and such institutions' as the Labour Bureau may possibly be worth their considerable.(cost to an" impoverished world. Even as a platform for what' is inaccurately called. the moral judgment of the world, it may do' more good than harm. In some of these activities the Dominions would probably wish to continue taking part, and also Britain. For that purpose Britain could apply for seoarate membership, on a par ,with the Dominions, after the withdrawal of the British Empire. But it would have to be made clear, if necessary, by- amending the Covenant, that there could be no question of any obligation to go to war on behalf of the League."

AN BIPRACTICABLE^OLICt.. ;1 "To sum up, the League of ■ Natiqns policy of the Imperial Conference.':■' is neither practicable uor desirable, because' (a) it commits this maritime Empire to a cortam role upon the continent, of Europe which it is by nature unable "to rulfll, thereby bringing it into discredit and ■ embittering its relations with res natural friends; (b) \t is a policy not adapted to joint responsibility foV defence, as between Britain and the Dominions; (c) it conflicts with the mdigenous foreign policy "of North America, and thus precludes both the active support of Canada and co-operation with the United States; (d) it -introduces" law Europe, a new ; cause.of ■strUe^the/Jexbtic colour' prejudices-' of". the". Britanriio peoples; ( c ) it is opposed to the "economic policy of Empire; Development, wriiun postu ates oceanic naval defence rather than hostile action against France or any other European Power." -•■'■■:■ '