NO ALTERNATIVE

Evening Post, Volume CXL, Issue 21, 25 July 1945, Page 5

NO ALTERNATIVE

ACCEPTANCE OF CHARTER X

One could not refrain from a feeling of disappointment at the outcome of .-the San Francisco Conference, stated Mr. F. W. Doidge (National, Tauranga) when he followed the Prime Minister. He said he thought the Prime Minister himself would agree that the Charter was not good enough. The Charter in the main sprang from the Dumbarton Oaks Conference—a fait accompli. There was no alternative but to accept it, and that was a pity. The Charter, however, said Mr. Doidge, with all its limitations, showed that we were seeking and feeling our way forward. " For that reason they must give the Charter their blessing.

Mr. Doidge said he thought it only right to say quite ungrudgingly that the Prime Minister at San Francisco acquitted himself with distinction, but that was not to say. that the people of New Zealand any more than the people of any other country were rejoicing at the outcome of the conference. The Opposition felt its approach to the consideration of the report on the conference should not be a party one. No one could find fault with the aims and aspirations defined in .the Charter, but had the conference built the right craft for the course that had been prepared? The covenant was there, but was there an ark to carry it? Discussing the power of veto, Mr. Doidge said it. simply did not make sense to a world that cried out for justice and peace. It meant that should any war, any great war, loom on the horizon the decision as to what should be done would rest not with the 50 nations, but with the five Great Powers and even among the five Great Powers it was not necessary that there should be unanimity. If one Great Power decided to standout that brought the whole structure to the ground. Anyone of the Great Powers had the right to veto joint action, and that meant that the Security Council could not coerce, prevent, or obstruct any Power bent on aggressive action. Not only, might any grest Power if it desired and was strong enough, defy the Charter, but actually it had a legal right to do so. That was one of the moral weaknesses of the Charter. "I think, added Mr. Doidge, "that the best that may be said about this phase of the Charter is that it seems that so long as the Great Powers do not quarrel among themselves they will be able to prevent minor wars."

BLOCS AND REGIONALISM.

Trusteeship and regionalism matters had occupied the conference, and as an outcome it seemed that blocs and regionalism had come to stay in international life, and he would suggest that the, question was whether the Security Council would be able to maintain overriding authority over it. It was clear throughout the conference that the smaller the nation the keener it was to guard jealously what it called and regarded as its sovereign rights. The Prime Minister, continued Mr. Doidge, did not say very much about the difficulties in the way of securing lasting peace, which even if the conference had been 100 per cent, successful would still confront the world. It was easy in discussing such a matter to take refuge in wishful thinking, to apply palliatives, and to take romantic views, but never was there a greater need for sound realism and sound thinking. It was eminently desirable that they should have no dangerous illusions and that they should not be tongue-tied. The obstacles to peace were far greater today than in laiy. In Europe there was an accumulation of hate that went far .deeper than after the last war. Europe today was a shattered continent. Our hope was that so long as Britain, the United States, and Russia could co-operate and work in harmony we need not immediately fear another war. They had to face facts and realise that working with Russia meant compromise, but compromise should not mean appeasement of Russia, otherwise it would mean that we would be exchanging one form of totalitarianism in Europe for another.

Even if Russia was regarded as the great imponderable and the great enigma, nevertheless they must seek every avenue of understanding, and that was why he thought the Potsdam meeting now in progress between Mr. Churchill, President Truman, and Generalissimo Stalin was of major importance and likely to bring better results than the San Francisco Conference.

DOMINION'S COMMITMENTS,

Mr. Doidge said he wished the. Prime Minister had told the House more about New Zealand's obligations under the charter. When New Zealand signed the charter it undertook to make available to the Security Council on its call armed forces, assistance, and facilities, including rights of passage, for the purpose of maintaining international peace and seciirity. Some ot the forces must be permanently available and they had to understand what that meant. ~ ~ ~, The Prime Minister said that the question of commitments would be the subject of subsequent agreement. Mr. Doidge said he was glad to hear, that. It was reasonable to assume that the responsibilities would not be light. The whole project opened up tremendous possibilities. He sincerely hoped that universal military training was the ultimate outcome. 1 here would also be a monetary contribution. Mr. Doidge expressed regret that the Government had not seen fit to invite the Leader of the Opposition when he was overseas to go to San Francisco when the conference was in session and had not accepted the view shared by Britain, Australia, and Canada that the conference transcended all considerations of party politics.