AIM AT SAN FRANCISCO

Evening Post, Volume CXXXIX, Issue 91, 18 April 1945, Page 6

AIM AT SAN FRANCISCO

JUSTICE AND RIGHTS OF NATIONS

(U.P.A. and 8.0. W.) Rec. noon. RUGBY, April 17. Mr. Attlee opened' the debate in the House of Commons on the San Francisco Conference. He said they would try to make a universal, flexible, and enduring: world organisation. They were faced with a great opportunity, in which they must not fail. Unless they could build up an organisation for the maintenance of peace there was little hope, immediate or future, for humanity. ' Unless they combined with other nations, the alternative was the continued menace of war, in ail probability a devastating war which would destroy much of civilisation.

They must be on guard lest, in seeking the ideal, they lost what was possible. They were seeking to create an organisation to prevent war. That was the main objective. The peace they sought must be based on the acceptance of the principles of justice and the rights of nations and the rights of individuals to live their own lives freely. They sought to build a world society to preserve peace and also a world worthy of the sacrifice of those who had fallen in the war— a world society inspired by the possibility of the Four Freedoms laid down by President Roosevelt.

Mr. Attlee said he was not asking the house to approve of every detail of the Dumbarton Oaks proposals, but to regard them as a ground-plan on which to work. The proposals were based on the principle that power and responsibility must be commensurate. Td some extent it was not given sufficient expression by the League of Nations. The responsibility for maintaining peace and security was fairly and securely laid on a Council. Only in that way could they prevent a further great conflict. They must avoid, on the one hand arbitrary action by Great Powers based on' no principle at all, .and on the other hand overelaboration of procedure which prevented action being taken at all, or in time.

It might be said that these were all words and promises which might not be carried out, but they must rely on the strength of the promises the Powers made to one another. The great thing was that they should come together with other States at their deliberations. It was no use talking about collective security, unless the nations had a common purpose and were prepared to work together.

Mr. Attlee argued that the Dumbarton Oaks proposals "were in advance of what the nations had had in the past. They were relying on the Great Powers agreeing to settle even the greatest dispute within the framework ot the international organisation. If they would not do that, no formula would save the world. He did not say the proposals were the last word, but he believed that when the States got together they would build up confidence. If they could get a sense of security in the world, justice and social and economic welfare would follow.

Mr. Attlee said the chance of preserving peace would be immeasurably enhanced if they could get full employment, a steadily rising standard of living, and full security in the world. I They could not get that without international co-operation. They had seen how narrow nationalism poisoned the international atmosphere. It was necessary to have a small [operating body, that could meet frequently and implement the decisions of the Assembly, and that was the reason for the Social and Economic Council, which might well prove one of the most important parts of the I "whole organisation. Referring to the part to be played by the Dominions, Mr. Attlee said hei was glad that Field-Marshal Smuts would be at the San Francisco Conference, as his expert advice, experience, and wisdom would be of great use. In conclusion, he said it had appeared at one time as if Britain would go down; but they had not gone down, and the qualities which had enabled r them to defeat tyranny should enable them to win the peace, and extend prosperity to the peoples of the world provided they had the right organisation to carry out the necessary work.