WORLD PROBLEMS

Evening Star, Issue 21724, 19 May 1934, Page 19

WORLD PROBLEMS

BRITISH POLITICAL LEADERS SPEAK SIR JOHN SIMON AND MR BALDWIN (British Official Wireless.) Press Association—By Telegraph—Copyright. RUGBY, May 18. (Received May 19, at 1 p.m.) Far Eastern affairs, disarmament, and the possibility of reforming the League of Nations were among the subjects raised by speakers in a debate in the House of Commons on the motion for the adjournment of the House until May 29. The Foreign Secretary,- replying for the Government, characterised the debate as an expression of the deep concern which they all felt at the international situation, which certainly was difficult, and might become threatening. He agreed that the present Covenant was capable of amendment, but it could only be altered if there was unanimity among the members of the Council, after which a majority in the Assembly was required. He took the view that if they were going to revise the League Covenant they wanted Germany in the League to help in the revision. To revise the League with Germany outside it was a very doubtful expedient. He much doubted whether the question could be taken up while the Disarmament Conference was in progress.

Turning to disarmament, Sir John Simon said that Britain was the one great Power that first of all set an example by unilateral reduction of armaments, and which had produced a connected scheme complete with figures. “ I do not believe we ought to go to Geneva and start new conditions,” he said. “ I think we should say we have tried to bring the British draft convention up to date, and wo feel it necessary to know what other people think of it.” Certainly the British Government would play its full part in saving the world from such a serious calamity as the breakdown of the conference. “ But let us not take the foolish view that, supposing it happens, it means the end of the world. On the contrary, if that happens wo have got to start the very next day on a new effort with a renewed purpose.” Replying to specific questions put by Sir Stafford Cripps, Sir John Simon said the answer to the question “ Does the Government still stand by the League of Nations’ report on the Far East?” was “ Certainly.” To the question “ Do wo still stand by our obligations under the Nine-Power Treaty to respect the territorial integrity of China?” the answer was that Britain remained bound by that treaty as did the other signatories, and the Government would certainly do its best’to observe it.

On the question of whether Britain regarded herself as bound by Article 2 of the League Covenant, the Minister’s answer was that the Government was hound by every article of the Covenant, and did not repudiate any article. r MR BALDWIN’S COUNSEL. ,An important contribution to the debate was made by Mr Baldwin. He said: “The question has been asked what would happen if the Disarmament Conference broke down? Do not let us assume that it will do so; hut if for the time being it should break down, then do not let ns lose heart. Let us remember that after all concentrated efforts after peace had seldom been made, if at all, in the world until these post-war years, and it is difficult to break an ingrained human habit in one decade.”.

It was, Mr Baldwin said, for limitation that they had been working in the British convention. Speaking for himself, he thought limitation the only practicable form of disarmament in the air. “If you could get limitation no single Power would be in a position of such superiority that the temptation to attack would become irresistible.” But there was a corollary. If Britain did agree to limitation it was difficult to sec how sanctions against anyone who broke that limitation could be voided, ** The moment you are up against sanctions,” said Mr Baldwin. “ You are up against war. In other words, if you are going to adopt sanctions you must be prepared and ready for war. If you adopt sanctions without being ready you arc not an honest trustee of the nation. There is no doubt in my mind that if you are going to force collective guarantees or collective sanctions it means that you have got to make this country a good deal stronger than it is to-day.” Mr Baldwin said he knew the anxiety felt in Britain in regard to the air, especially if the Disarmament Conference should fail and no agreement for air limitation be reached. That anxiety had not been lessened by the events in Europe during the last few months. The House would remember his recent statement on behalf of the Government regarding this subject. That statement stood. Ho knew his friends hoped that he would say when and in what circumstances the Government would make a more definite declaration. They could trust the Government, which was also anxious on that matter, but he would say one thing which would allay anxiety. Any decision to increase the Air Force could not bo put into effect without months of detailed preparation. He would say the preliminary work was now being done so that if their fears were realised, and it was necessary to implement the pledge he had given, not a single day would be lost. In view of the general anxiety on tho subject, it was right that the Government should take such a course, but he was also certain that there was no danger in the near future before Britain, and there might be less danger in the future than they imagined.

THE FAR EAST LONDON, May 18. (Received May 19, at 1.30 p.m.) In initiating the debate in the House of Commons, Sir Stafford Cripps (Labour) sharply attacked Japanese expansion in China. Ho said that once .Japan had digested the North, she would be ready for a bit of South China, and Britain and the other European Powers would be forced out of the Far East altogether. Admiral Sir Roger Keyes said that Japan was destined to play a very great part in the East. He advised the Government to come to a good understanding with Japan. The best guarantee for world peace was a properly defended British Empire. Singapore was no more a menace to Japan than Portsmouth was to New York.