STOP-WAR CONFERENCE

Greymouth Evening Star, 28 November 1927, Page 5

STOP-WAR CONFERENCE

DELEGATES’ PREDICTIONS

GENERAL STRIKE URGED

(Australian and N.Z. Cable Association. (By Cable—Press Assn.—Copyright.)

LONDON, November 25. Disarmament has overshadowed every subject in England for weeks. Lord Cecil’s statement in the JLords anent to his resignation has aroused some misgivings as to the Government’s programme, and it was largely responsible for Labour’s attack in the Commons. On the contrary, the reduction of the British cruiser programme finds a responsive echo in America, where it is regarded as a handsome gesture of conciliation, together with Lord Balfour’s declaration as regard the naval conference, that it has interrupted and not ended the disarmament conference at Geneva. The coming week is expected to produce the plainest, speaking yet heard in that connection.

It is more than a coincidence that the war danger conference of the “No more war” movement has been held in London during the week. Prominent leaders did not disguise the fears of the present drift towards war. Signor Nitti emphasised that even allowing for disarmament of the defeated nations, Germany, AustriaHungary and Bulgaria, Europe had a million more armed men than before the war. Though Geneva discussed disarmament, armament _ continued, and the spirit of peace did not exist. Though there was not hatred, the people were dragged to war by hidden forces. M.*De Jouvenal, in a message to the conference, said: “I look forward to 1935 with dread. Those who conducted the peace negotiations, built up a structure that would be good for fifteen years, but what is fifteen years. I repeat—l93s is a crucial year. France will then have a minimum strength and will have lost the protection afforded by the occupation of the Rhine. I hope with all my heart the League before 1935, will have gained authority necessary to prevent a recurrence of war. I beg to make with the whole of my poor powers an appeal to British friends for peace. America wanted to remain isolated in 1924, but could not. Neither can Britain be separated by a narrow frontier channel, with London entirely at the mercy of air raids. Whether, we want or do not want to be mutually concerned, wjp must be.” He concluded by expressing the . opinion , that in the event. of. another European war, America would not be on the same side as England. General Von Schoeniach, described as the idol of the Germaji Militarist Press during the war, said that the danger did not come from German militarism, or nationalism, but from the big owners of- important raw materials. “When the oil kings cannot agree,”- ’lie said, “then other people must fight for them.” ' M. Edo Fremmen, Secretary of the International Federation, advocated that a last resource of active resistance to war should be general strike. The consequence would probably be civil war, but it was better to lose a hundred thousand. men in that way than millions in. an international conflict. There was a roar of disapproval to which: he retorted: “If the sacrifice of a few thousands, would, stop a great war, it would. be right.” There was . a ’thunderclap roar. “No!” “Never!” Several rose and left the hall, protesting. Von Schoeniach made some women gasp when he declared that after 35 years as a soldier, he also favoured a general strike. He said: “The next war will not be a soldiers’ war, it will be a war' on women and children in London, Paris and Berlin. We must fight to the last against war.” Signor Nitti, at the close of the conference to-night, made a final appeal. He said: “It is for Britain to lead the world, because she is the sovereign among nations.' If you obey the call and put all your forces at the command of the common effort for peace, success is certain.” The closing scenes of the conference were lively.

ECONOMIST’S PREDICTION

LONDON, November 26.

While M. De Jouvenal was forecasting a war peril in 1935, Sir George Paisli was saying at Oxford that the world is drifting into bankruptcy, and that a breakdown of trade and credit will come in the spring of 1928, unless the nations act quickly. The nations are putting up huge tariff barriers to prevent the buying of goods outside their own countries, and as a result are finding a difficulty in selling their own goods in foreign markets.

RUSSIAN DELEGATION.

GENEVA, November 27

The Soviet delegation headed by M. Litvinoff arrived. They occupy the whole third floor of the hotel Delafaix, wherefrom are signs of an avalanche of propaganda daily. Several hotel proprietors declined to accommodate the party fearing anti-Bolshevik demonstrations. The party includes several women, smartly dressed. It might be supposed from M. Litvinoff’s statements that the world never heard of the question of disarmament before, or the Polish-Lithuan-ian dispute. All the statesmen of the world need is to listen to Moscow, who will cure all ills.

AMERICAN ALOOFNESS.

AVASHINGTON, November 25

Air Coolidge does not favour the resolutions which are expected to be introduced into Congress, proposing the outlawry of war and which aim to maintain peace by international agreement. He said : “I believe the suggested plans offer only illusory short cuts to the goal of universal peace. The proffered plans are impracticable and unlikely to succeed because of the many obstacles they are bound to meet. There is no more short cut to peace than to salvation. The arms and food embargo, he said, would involve the United States in a dispute with other nations, and lead to international recriminations that would draw the United States into conflict. The . maintenance of her traditional attitude of non-interference excepting in unusual circmustancbs, was the only sure way for the United States to avoid embroilment in European affairs, and the constant danger of war. Air Coolidge added: “The UnitedStates believes whatever steps are

taken to preserve peace, should be made individually and not acting :in concert with other nations. The United States will gain little by agreeing, to meet other nations in discussions on avoiding war.” Congress is expected, as a result of the President’s'views, to relegate these proposals to thfe background, and hopes for- Messrs Borah’s, • Capper’s and Burton’s resolutions providing for the outlawry of war and the establishment of an international tribunal, are considerably lessened.

EMPIRE DEFENCE.

NEW YORK, November 26.

The New York Times, editorially, says: “The action of New Zealand in voting one million pounds towards the cost of the Singapore base should not be regarded as an unfriendly gesture directed against any Power or group of Powers bordering the Pacific. It merely bears witness to the loyalty of New Zealanders to the Empire. Since New Zealanders and Australians alike regard Singapore as a rallying point of British interests in the Western Pacific, it is natural and proper that they prove their faith by works. The close community of interests between the Dominion and the United States has established a solidarity which not even the blasts of Chicago’s Mayor can shake. Canada, New Zealand and Australia, are pioneer countries facing problems similar to those faced by America, peopled by kindred stocks and having similar forms of government. They view the world more nearly eye to eye than do any other nations. So long as the Dominions form essential links in the Empire, they cannot remain aloof from the Empire defence, hence it is only fitting that they take a share of the cost of the defensive forces of the Empire, which as British delegates at the Geneva conference aptly showed, are essential for the protection of Britain’s far flung lines of commerce and communication.”