“IS WAR INEVITABLE?”

Evening Star, Issue 18925, 27 April 1925, Page 3

“IS WAR INEVITABLE?”

INSTRUCTIVE ADDRESSES Addresses appropriate to AnzacDayjere given in the Jimnire Theal* ong >rda } evening by I'roW Fisher, Miss H. M. King, and Mr P. Moilaon. the meeting was hold evitable? The Alternative.’ Mx I rank Jones occupied the choir. n t Professor A. G. B. Fisher, professoi o economics at the Otago University said that in some* repeats we had moved. _ o way from the high ideal_ t poses that had characterised the thou and action of the best minds in • days of the war. They were en on. gaged in a war to end -a wai , •‘, fundamentally tho purpose that j the struggle. Discussion had centred for t.ho most part round tho problem 0 settlement of disputes and the- enfoi-e----ment of sanctions against outsiders or against recalcitrant members o i League. ' Such problems wore important, but in tho long run it might be prefoiable to pav more attention to tlie constructive side of the League’s work rather than its preventive side. _ Tn the B a o there existed a bench of judges and a police force, to which llieie wa* no parallel outside the State, > which disputes could be settled, ine court of law and the policeman would not be very effective unless the rules to be enforced were fairly clearly" defined. they were merely the machinery of the State, and without power to drive the machine! y it would bo idle or ineffective. It was the comparative absence of any such rules of law in international relations that made it so difficult to persuade nations to submit their disputes to arbitration. They did not know —no one knew—the principles that might influence the minds of the arbitrators, and it was not surprising that they had been unwilling to bind themselves beforehand. The courts of justice did not develop these principles, but existed to interpret the law. In quite a variety of special departments and communities the League of Nations was already making steady, if cautious, m-ogress, and reducing to order the chaos that still characterised human relations outside tho boundaries of tho State. Ihe whole of the departments was not dramatic or spectacular, and afforded few opportunities for effective oratory. But ho was convinced that we had here the means of performing perhaps Ihe most important function ot the League—first, by introducing order into tho causes of disputes, and, second, by providing opportunities lor the development of a technique of internal administration which was quite essential if international relations were to be made in any degree civilised. It was neither necessary nor desirable to elaborate the possibilities in each department in detail. The mandatory system was usually defended, because it made it possible, however, imperfectly, to safeguard the interests of native populations and to protect them from exploitation. He did not wish to minimise the importance of that, but ho suggested that tho real importance of the mandatory system lay in the opportunity it provided for working out an internal code regulating colonial government and colonial relations. I‘rofcssor Fisher (hen referred to the work of the League, and, continuing, said the present organisation of the Foreign Offices of Europe had been subjected from time to time to severe and more or less justified criticism ; but even were they to be thoroughly democratised and reformed it would bo much more important to attack tho problem from the other end. What was needed was to squeeze out tho elements of poison which now provided the material for diplomatic correspondence. If the work of, tho League were encouraged, they might hope for the time when most of the subjects which were now considered suitable for treatment onlv th rough th© ordinary 7 diplomatic channels might be discussed quite outside the conventional Foreign Office methods. He believed that the League could develop still further along the linos indicated, and ho declined to believe that war was inevitable, Whether such development would take place would depend on the degree of intelligent support it received from th© people throughout tho world. (Loud applause.)

Miss I’hyllis West gave a song, which was well received.

Miss King said the question was one very apposite to Hie occasion. Had they really considered Hie number of lives laid down in war.' New Zealand alone lost something hire 18,000, and it was a small countiy, and a people little in number. And 18,0v0 of the flower ol our manhood had been lost in that war. Could they Como there and consider that, it was ine\itable that the affairs of mankind demanded such a sacrifice of them again? The object of the. war had been to end war, and we were still asking ourselves : "is war inevitable?’’ Why? Because among us some were ignorant, some a good deal prejudiced, and some doubters, and of little faith. Consider first tho meaning of the word “inevitable.” A thing was inevitable because it could not be avoided. One thing was in writable, and that was that it we continued to conduct our affairs as we had done in tho past we would have war. Had wc not learned our lesson yot? A thing was inevitable when wo set a- cause in motion, and were wo going to set the same cause in motion again, or were we going to bring into action a new set of causes? Alisa King said tho humanitarian work of tho League was one of the, most important branches of tho League’s constructive work. She next spoke of other activities of the League, such ns attempting to bring about an improvement in tho sanitary conditions of countries, and thereby minimise the risk of world-wide disease, the rescue of homeless refugees, etc. She expressed the opinion that too many people did not think at all, or if they did it was casually, and compared the cost of the. exisitiico of the League with the cost of war. She did not believe it cost the price of a battleship.

Mr Neilson said that if a thing were traced back to its cause it could be remedied. Effects had their causes, and that was what they were trying to explain, lie believed that war was produced as a result of men’s love of profit, the ownership of land, machinery production — everything used in production and the things essential to life. Bo long as these things were privately owned for private protits war would be inevitable. lie. was satisfied that when they could get Hie truth fairly and squarely before the- people they would help the League. A hearty vote of thanks was passed to the speakers and vocalist, and the proceedings closed with the singing of the National Anthem.