IDEAS AND FACTS

Evening Post, Volume CXIX, Issue 134, 8 June 1935, Page 11

IDEAS AND FACTS

THE ARMAMENTS ISSUE

ARCHBISHOP'S ATTACK

'GROWING INSECURITY"

Many people will like to read the full report of the speech of the Archbishop of Canterbury given in the House of Lords on the White Paper, and the proposed increases in expenditure on the Army, Navy, and the Air Force, says "Public Opinion." Although the British declaration has lost much of its significance in view of recent events, the Archbishop's statement is none the less significant and worthy of consideration. Dr. Lang said: — . ~ "I have no wish to take any considerable part in this discussion, but as I have played a-part in these matters in the country I feel my silence might be misinterpreted. "I freely admit that when I first read this White Paper it filled me with a sense of disappointment. 1 do not think that I or anyone else could have contemplated this expenditure of an additional £10,000,000 with equanimity. On the contrary, one's great desire is to lift not only from this nation, but from every nation, the burden of armaments. To know, then, that £10,000,000 was being added to the overstrained finances of this country did indeed seem deplorable.

"Further, I must confess that it was disappointing that there should be even an appearance of this country abandoning what I still consider the admirable lead which so far it has given to other nations •in disarmament, even the appearance that it was entering, however modestly, into the race of armaments; and I must admit that there were phrases in the White Paper which seemed to me not so much necessary for that frankness that leads to a better. understanding—as capable of, giving rise, to needless misunderstanding. "UNDESIRABLE AND UNDERHAND." "In the first place, I cannot but note that except as regards the Air Force, it does not propose—indeed that is common ground except in regard to the Air Force—any increase in armaments but only an increase in equipment and efficiency. It is possible to contend that the existenc of any armed force in a country is wrong, because the use of it would be wrong. That is a logical theory. "But unless one holds that particular theory, I do not see how it can be contended that if any force is justifiable at all for defence, or for the fulfilment of international obligations, it can be justifiable to keep that force obsolete and inefficient. I should like to stress that point. It seems to me that to leave what armaments there are, if they are capable of any sort of justification, ill a state of inefficiency is to practise a peculiarly undesirable and underhand form of unilateral disarmament. "As to the Air Force, no doubt that causes greater disquiet, but after all it is only what was foreshadowed many months ago. Ido not think there is anything novel in it, and therefore I find it difficult to realise the horribleness of the prospect which this particular increase opens out. REGIONAL AGREEMENTS. "There are two concurrent features to which I think critics b£ the White ■Paper'-.ought to pay attention. The firsts is the encouragement of those regional.agreements»by which nations interested together, situated together geographically, possibly confronted by common dangers, agree to protect each other against a possible aggressor within that group. I should feel grave doubts about this policy of regional pacts and agreements if they could be interpreted as alliances of groups of nations intended to protect themselves against some.other nation that was assumed to be likely to be aggressive. "But that is not their purpose. They are pacts of mutual assurance, and, if that be so, I cannot but think that the extension of them, the exetnsion, if we may so call it, of the policy of Locarno, cannot but make in the direction of that collective security which we all desire. ■ . "Here, perhaps, it might be. worth, while to remark that the success of these regional pacts must very largely depend upon the degree in which each nation within them can rely upon the others' fulfilling the obligations, possibly the.obligations of the use of force, which they have undertaken, and that, therefore, is another reason why it would not be promoting the success of ;these regional pacts if any country, such as ourselves, which is responsible for one of them were to allow its armaments, if any justification of armaments is possible, largely to become obsolete. We should not be putting it plainly, we should not be playing the game with those with whom we have entered into common obligations if we did that. GERMANY AND THE LEAGUE. "There is another feature of the policy of the Government which, I think, it is only fair to remember and appreciate, and that is their obviously earnest desire to bring Germany back into the League of Nations. It is common ground that if Germany is not included in that League, it cannot function in the way which we all desire. Accordingly, I regard it as a matter of great importance—and I am sure the Government do the same—that every effort should be made to persuade Germany to take that place without which neither can the collective system of the League work, nor can any general system of disarmament throughout the world take place.

"I think it is unfortunate to imply that in the present situation Germany alone is to blame. I think the Allies have a very large share of blame in having been so slow in attempting to implement the solemn declarations of Versailles. As soon as it was plain that the Allies were making no serious attempt to level their armaments down to the German level, it was certain that Germany would insist upon levelling her armaments up to the level of the Allies. We ought to have recognised that long ago, and to have taken steps accordingly. Therefore, I do not agree with any implication, if it be contained in the White Paper, that the whole blame should be laid on Germany. "At the same time it is clear that now we are ready to receive Germany in the comity of nations in a position of perfect equality of status. I cannot but believe that there must be some appeasement of the tension at present existing if the system of regional agreements is extended and fulfils the functions assigned to it by Sir Austen Chamberlain elsewhere— namely, that it is not a substitute for the League of Nations but the underpinning of the structure of which the League of Nations is the basis. "A DELUSION." "If that be so, and Germany can be persuaded to enter into the League of Nations, then there will be a position created which will make it more hopeful to resume conferences on disarmament than has hitherto existed for many years past. It.is not because I wish the question of disarmament to be in any way postponed or belittled,

but, on the contrary, because I believe it to be vital, that I am anxious in these ways to bring about a state of things in which the Disarmament Conference can be resumed with greater helpfulness than before.

"It is only through some general disarmament conference which is sih> rounded by an atmosphere of security which does not at present exist that Europe generally and the world can proceed to deal, and deal adequately, I hope, with that horrible portent of the continuance and development of war in the air.

"I do not abate for one moment my conviction that armaments are no security, that in the long run, if a nation thinks that by increasing its own armament it is increasing its security, it will find it is labouring under.' a .delusion,, .because it is only, thereby increasing the sense of insecurity in other nations."