'COMMONSENSE OR CHAOS'

Evening Star, Issue 21093, 4 May 1932, Page 9

'COMMONSENSE OR CHAOS'

ADDRESS BY DR A. G. B. FISHER WORLD PROBLEMS DISCUSSED ‘pommonsense ox- Chaos’ was the subject of an adrjycss by Dr A. G. B. Fisher (professor of economics at Otago University) at the annual meeting of the Otago branch of the New Zealand League of Nations Union, held in the Y.M.C.A. last night, the speaker dealing most interestingly and lucidly with the international problems of the day. The Chairman (the Rev. H. E. Bellhouse) said that they ■welcomed Dr Fisher, -who was an ex-president of the Ndw Zealand League of Nations Union, on his return from a world tour, and from his observations Dr Fisher would give them his impressions of the tremendous problems confronting the world to-day. In his opening x-emarks Dr Fisher said that reference had been made to the decrease in membership. This was a sign of general uneasiness which was to be observed in many parts of the world at the pi‘esent time. It was partly due to the economic position and also partly to the belief in the ineffectiveness of League action. There was a good deal of justification for the disappointment people had felt, but so far from indicating that the need for the League of Nations had become less or weaker as the result of the events of the last year or two, he had observed in Europe and elsewhere that well-in-formed public opinion of the type they were trying to mobilise here was that it was more necessary than ever.

The speaker went on ta state that during last year he had spent a considerable time in Geneva, and found it possible to observe the ordinary day-to-day work of the League of Nations Secretariat and International Labour Office. He thought it was most valuable to get some sense of the League atmosphere when ordinary routine work was being done. The speaker was also basing his remarks on his general impressions of the internal situations in German}’-, Austria, Hungary, Denmark, England, and the United States. It had been constantly said that the world was now a unit, but the basic trouble about the world situation was that although everyone knew the world was a unit so few people were willing to mould their policies in accordance with that fact. The fate of each part ot the world was bound up with the fate of each other part, but there were so very few statesmen who were prepared to mould their national policies with this obvious and fundamental fact. One of the most striking events of the Council meeting in May last, said Dr Fisher, was the announcement by the Austrian delegate that the most important of the Austrian banks had just failed. It was a very significant fact to hear this announcement by the highest authority of the League of Nations—the accredited representative ot one of the important, though perhaps now minor, European Powers. On the whole, nothing very much at the time was done, but it was an important fact that it was the failure of this bank in Vienna which led, with all' its influences, to a tremendous upset in the credit organisations in England and Germany and throughout the world. Not only were the fates of nations linked together, but in more subtle ways the impacts of opinion from one country to another were of very great important. The phenomenal advance of the Nazi Party in Germany was referred to by the speaker, an advance which he characterised as being fraught with grave danger to Germany and to all Europe, and which was due to the failure of people in other countries to realise the position in Germany. He had been told by a Communist in Berlin that the attitude of France and the groups associated with it made the people in Germany exaspei’ated and willing to listen to the violent measures of the Communists. As the results of the development of nationalistic sentiment in almost every part of Europe there was, unfortunately, a state strain which was a barrier to the realisation of international unity. There were at the present time two centres of tension, of possible dispute. There was still in Europe the difference in outlook between Germany and Prance (supported by her allies). This centred round the problem of reparations and payment of war debts. It was now nearly twelve months since President Hoover had made his moratorium proposals for the payment of war debts, which was done for the purpose of giving nations breathing space. There had been delay in accepting the terms of the moratorium, and it was scarcely an exaggeration to say that nothing had been done to make effective the hopes held by Mr Hoover when he made these proposals, and the position of the world was no better than when the proposals were first made. It was not a very encouraging thing for the exercise of further generosity when the failure of Europe to respond was observed. The second centre of possible friction was with regard to the Manchurian relations between Japan and China. He mentioned these to justify the opinion that the general situation called most urgently for constant, earnest, and self-sacrificing work and thought to prevent the crashing that otherwise was not improbable. Another general impression one got from travelling abroad was that many people were afraid to look very far ahead. Because times were _so difficult and dangerous it made it all the more importart for people to_ look ahead. He had had an opportunity of observing for about five months the work of the League, and from the point of view of the work of advisory bodies it was not correct to say that they had put forward no valuable suggestions for getting the world back on its feet. Tho League had been very prolific in work of that kind, and if various proposals put forward had been carried out the position of the world would have been much easier. So the 1 weaknesses of the League were not to be sought for in that direction. It had been made clear that economic recovery could not take place so long as there was restriction to trade between various countries, and instead of efforts being made to remove the restrictions they had been increased. He also referred to the character and quality of the work done by tho League Secretariat. It was with great zeal and earnestness that many members carried out their work, and whatever criticism might be levelled at the League, the Secretariat had had an incredible degree of success in getting co-ordination between people of different races and outlook. If the League had faults, those faults were not to, lie found in the members of the League Secretariat. It was not time to suppose that every person who went to Geneva to serve on tho Secretariat was filled with a burning sense of idealism, for many took up the work in the ordinary way, being not particularly outstanding perhaps. The work at Geneva, however, had its influence unconsciously. It was a striking fact that many nationals, after being there for three or four years, returned to their own capitals to learn on getting back to their own countries the clash be-

tween their state of mind and the ordinary national state of mind. An international sense had grown np in them unconsciously. That was rather a heartening fact, and one might draw, the conclusion that it was of importance that as many people as possible should be subjected to that influence. If the Secretariat of the League was so satisfactory where its personnel was concerned, and the work of the various advisory committees .was also satisfactory, what was it that stood in the way and hampered the operations of the League? The most definite evidence they had of influences causing difficulties was in the sitting of the Committee on European Union. The discussion showed a very deplorable tendency on the part of representatives of numbers of countries to gloss oyer their reluctance to do anything definite by verbiage and expressions of goodwill. Everyone knew in May last that Europe was in a bad way because each nation was trying to run its “ own show ” independently of the others. Speeches in the end meant little. The main reason was that the representatives were afraid that if they did take any risks they would find when they got back to their own countries that their people would not support them. Ur Eisner said that when he visited Manchuria more than a year ago it was clear that there was tension between the Japanese and Chinese. One reason why the representatives of the League Council were unwilling to face clearly and definitely the situations developing in Manchuria and later in! Shanghai was that they had wellfounded doubts as to whether they, could rely on the support of their, people at home. Dr Fisher said that even in Great Britain itself there was a large important section of public opinion which was glad to have the League of Nations shown up as a comparatively weak thing, and this made all the more necessary the work of such organisations as theirs. It was impossible to say that the Manchurian situation was finite and settled—it was a plastic, situation, and that was further justification for their organisation. He added that people in Geneva welcomed the support they had received from various countries throughout the world. It had been pointed out to him that the contributions of the repre-i seutatives of some of the smaller countries were often of very great value,; and those of Sir James Allen wera particularly mentioned, yet those contributions were very largely personal because of the lack of interest on the part of the Government here. If they could make valuable contributions to the League under those circumstances, how much more effective would they bo if the representatives had, the enthusiastic backing of the Government. _ la conclusion, he urged that very citizen should make it his aim to impress upon members of Parliament that public opinion was solidly behind the principles of international harmony, upon which world peace depended. (Applause.) A vote of thanks to the speaker was moved by Ur Merrington. Right Rev. Bishop Richards seconded the motion, which was carried by acclamation.