The Evening Star WEDNESDAY, JUNE 17, 1936. SANCTIONS.

Evening Star, Issue 22367, 17 June 1936, Page 10

The Evening Star WEDNESDAY, JUNE 17, 1936. SANCTIONS.

Speaking at a trad© function in London, the Secretary of State for War made some remarks pertinent to the present international situation, which he declared to be worse than it was in the early part of 1914. “ We are told,” said Mr Duff-Cooper. “ that we are frightening people. I think it is the duty of those in authority to frighten people.” The interpretation of these assertions is that Great Britain, in trying to lead the nations along the path to peace, disarmed to a point that was extremely dangerous to the national security, and that the strengthening of the country’s defences is an imperative duty. The logic of the situation is with the Minister. In the pre-war days the voice of Lord Roberts was one crying in the wilderness. He and other wise men issued warnings. Little hoed was paid to them, but, fortunately, the Empire’s defences were in a much stronger position than they arc to-day. Mr DuffCooper’s words arc timely. They do not mean that war is necessarily imminent. His desire is to bring realisation to the people of the dangerous possibilities that exist and to counsel them to be prepared for any untoward development. -An international, problem of immediate interest is that of sanctions. This matter is receiving publicity as the result of a statement by Mr Neville Chamberlain, who, as Chancellor of the Exchequer and an intimate friend of Mr Baldwin, exercises strong influence in the Cabinet meetings. What is described as Viscount Cecil’s belligerent pacifist campaign is in favour of continuing sanctions. Mr Chamberlain takes the opposite view, declaring that that system has been tried and failed, for the reason that tho League had been given a task beyond its powers. That weakness in the organisation has been pointed out from time to time ever since it was formed. It was argued that if a major Power defied tho League and committed an act of aggression, it could only bo brought lo book by an act of war. Mr Chamberlain gives support to this contention when he- said that the policy of sanctions involved, if not war, at least the risk of war, and that risk must increase in proportion to the effectiveness of sanctions. Tho statement of tho Chancellor is a courageous facing of realities. When -Mr Baldwin was pressed in the House of Commons to say whether the expression of private tviows by a Minister that had been re’corded was consistent jyith tradition

and constitutional usage, the Prime Minister significantly replied: “I make no complaint myself of what tho right honourable gentleman said.” Ono thing is quite clear, and that is that no further help can be expected from France. Tho Government of that country has its hands full at tho moment in trying to bring order out of tho domestic chaos that prevails, and in any case it is reported to regard the maintenance of sanctions as useless and dangerous. If that statement is correct it would mean throwing further responsibility on Britain, which already', to say the least, has done her full share in carrying out her obligations to the , League. Italy’s acts in Abyssinia cannot be condoned. There is no need to labour that point. She has achieved her aims in defiance of League principles. What lias now to be found is the wisest and most practical course. The supreme aim should be the maintenance of international peace, for another European war is too aw'ful to contemplate. Reform of the League Covenant, based on the experiences of the last two or three years, and continuance of the efforts for collective security are immediate objectives that give the best chance of success. There seems to be a strong feeling in Britain that the employment of further sanctions would act as an irritant at a moment when healing measures are. greatly to be desired. The latest news regarding the French attitude is that the Chamber of Deputies is against the continuance of sanctions and that, of course, will bo an important factor in deciding the policy of the British Cabinet.