SOUTH AMERICA AND THE LEAGUE.

Evening Star, Issue 19763, 13 January 1928, Page 4

SOUTH AMERICA AND THE LEAGUE.

In the course of an interview in Paris the Foreign Minister of the Argentine Republic expressed the- hope that Argentina would re-enter the League of Nations, enabling it to participate in the Assembly at Geneva next Septom--1 r. From tbe inception of the League the South American States have shown marked interest in its progress and work. Considering the turbulent history of the southern half of the continent and the mixed blood of tho people who inhabit it, this presents a curious phenomenon. It is credited to the interest taken in international events, nn attribute to the universality of the Latin mind, Practical participation in world events was manifested in South America during war time, and immediately afterwards. Brazil entered the World War, and Bolivia, Ecuador, Peru, and Uruguay severed relations with Germany, while Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Paraguay, and Venezuela aocepted an invitation to accede to the Covenant. Representatives of the first five sat at the Peace Conference, and they all affixed their signatures to tho Treaty of Versailles. Ecuador, however, did not follow up the work that she had begun, because she failed to ratify any of tho treaties arising fjoin the war, and never became a member of the League of Nations. In the general attitude of these South American States we thus see a desire to bo associated with world events and to further the cause of peace among the nations of tho world. This is in marked contrast to the general official attitude taken up by tho United States, the Government of which, until tho last I'cw days at any rate, has repeatedly expressed its determination not to be mixed up in the affairs of Europe, contenting itself with mere expressions of goodwill, Argentina showed enterprise from her first association with the League. At the opening Assembly she proposed modifications of the Covenant that were in advance of what was practical at the time. Her propositions were that the League must be open lo all who desired to enter it; that tho composition of the Council should be modified on the principle of universality mid equality; that there should ho established a permanent court ol international justice embodying the principles of compulsory arbitration and compulsory jurisdiction. Tho Assembly took the easiest way out of an embarrassing situation by adopting a resolution declaring that no amendments would be considered during its sessions. As a consequence Argentina withdrew from that body, and she has taken no active part in tho main objectives of the League since then. One matter that she has participated in was tho deliberations of the committee on the question of the composition of the Council, reiterating her previous utterance in favor of the principle of universality and equality in its composition, lior contention being that until that was provided tho League would continue to be a league of the nations of Europe, and not a league of the nations of the world.

Brazil took a stand similar to that of the Argentine on this question, declaring that the Council had too many members from Europe—seven out of ten—and that Latin America was the only continental grouping having no permanent seat on the Council. Brazil did not get her way in the matter, and as a result she resigned her seat on the Council, and served notice that she would withdraw' from its membership after the required two years had expired. Out of the ten republics in Smith America five only are active members of the League. Chile and Uruguay have been conspicuously energetic in promoting its work, while Paraguay, Colombia, and Venezuela have done as much as could bo expected irom them. It is unfortunate that tho two most powerful States should have held themselves aloof for the reason that they were unable to convince the majority that theirs was a more excellent way. The indications are, however, that they will join up again heloro long. It may be thought that South America’s attitude, to the League is not of much consequence, but that is a mistaken idea. hi tho first place, apart from the moral influence implied, it prevents the States fighting among themselves, with the danger of repercussions in other directions, and, secondly, it should have some influence with the United States in determining the future actions of that country in international matters. With Canada and the principal southern republics striving for League ideals, the invidious position of the Government at Washington would be further emphasised.