LEAGUE ASSEMBLY

Greymouth Evening Star, 9 September 1927, Page 7

LEAGUE ASSEMBLY

SMALLER POWERS’ PROTEST TOO MUCH CENTRALISATION ? (Australian and N.Z. Cable Association.) (By Cable—Press Assn.—Copyright.) GENEVA, September 7. Prospects of the eighth assembly of the League have changed from sunshine to stormy. Mr Van Blokman (Dutch delegate) inaugurated the change by making his impressioned plea for disarmament which amounted to a demand for the revivals of the defunct Geneva Protocol. All the small States favour' the Dutch proposal, but the big Powers are critical. The matter is causing a hubbub of excitement in the League lobbies, and it has made Herr Stresemann cancel his arrangements for a return to Berlin on Friday. “The dead speaks,” is how the local press sums up the reception of Mr. Van Blokman’s speech. In other words, the Geneva Protocol was believed to have been buried in 1924, but it is now found to have been only sleeping. A big group of the smaller Powers are bent on awakening it. Their viewpoint is this: —“You larger Powers have your Locarno Treaties. You can afford to dismiss any general treaty for arbitration, security, and disarmament; but we smaller Powers are not protected, and we are alarmed to see the manner in which you have removed from the League the decision of the biggest international differences in recent years!” The result of these manoeuvrings for the resurrection of the Geneva protocol and of Poland’s agitation for a Security Pact covering Eastern Europe, is to put the British Empire delegation in an awkward position. The advocates of both the propositions state frankly that everything depends on the British attitude. Prolonged conferences between the heads of the Empire delegation are being held. The general British view point is that nothing li’as occurred to make the Geneva Protocol more welcome to the Empire, and that it must therefore be countered strenuously. This opposition to the Protocol continues to be unanimouk amongst the British Empire delegations. Their discussion chiefly concern the tactics to be employed by- them to get the Protocol out of the way. Poland’s resolution has not yet been finally drafted. Apparently it requires the whole of the League’s signatories to pledge themselves to compulsory arbitration and non aggression. Originally large numbers of the small Powers had pledged themselves to support Poland, but day-long endeavours by the “big three” have been made to get the Polish proposition turned down. The real ground for the Big Powers’ opposition is a feeling that Poland is seeking to use the League to establish permanently the status quo on Germany’s eastern frontier. Britain is determined not to commit the Empire to any further obligations in Eastern Europe beyond those included in the League Covenant and the locarno pacts. POLAND’SPROPOSAL. LONDON, Sept. 8. It is unofficially stated that Poland’s suggested all-round pact covers three principles—first as a protocol, and secondly, arbitration and disarmament —by providing for the outlawry of all forms of war. Secondly, it provides for arbitration in all disputes. and thirdly provides for the stabilisation of the present armaments until a reduction is possible. JURISTS’ CONFERENCE' LONDON, Sept. 8. Geneva Jurists sat till past midnight and reached an agreement on the Polish nonaggression scheme and are submitting it to the Assembly this afternoon.

NOTABLE SPEECHES. •- (A.P.A. & Sun.) GENEVA, September 8. Looking frequently at Sir A. Chamberlain, the Norwegian, M. Hambro, vigorously criticised the Council, especially the secret activity of the Council within the Council, by which agendas of all important questions were discussed before submission to the General Council. He declared that many delegates notoriously did not favour publicity and openness. Why, asked M. Hambro, should the League under-secretaries only belong to the Great Powers? He added that although the Norwegian Government appreciated the secretarial work, it opposed council members re-eligibility for re-election, believing the League would do even more if it brought in the Powers still outside. The speech was heartily applauded, many delegates congratulating and patting M. Hambro on his returning to his seat. The Greek, M. Politis, in a ninety minutes’ extempore speech, associated himself with M. Van Blokland’s resolution, but declared, as one of the builders of the defunct Geneva Protocol in 1924, that he believed although it was never enforced, it had entered people’s minds, anjd would sometime become the law of the nations. There was no justification for pessimism and discouragement regarding the League’s work. Criticisms were based on erroneous conceptions of its functions. The public discussion on delicate matters .might further complicate international relations. He believed the obstacles to compulsory arbitration were diminishing, but sanctions were essential to make arbitration effective. He paid a tribute to the secretariat’s codification of the international law, which was the first indispensable preliminary to security. A number of delegates, Including Sir A. Chamberlain, congratulated M. Politis.