BRITAIN AND SECURITY

Greymouth Evening Star, 30 September 1935, Page 7

BRITAIN AND SECURITY

SIR S. HOARE’S LETTER WILL STAND BY COVENANT • N [BRITISH OFFICIAL WIRELESS] RUGBY, September 28. The text of the letter signed by Sii S. Hoare, which was handed to the . French Ambassador on September 26 ■ is now published. The terms are: — “In the inquiry you were so good as to address to Sir R. Vansittart or September 10, Your Excellency express' ed the desire of your Government in connection with the dispute between Italy and Abyssinia, to learn to what extent they might be assured in future of immediate and effective application by this country of all Sanctions, provided by Article 16 of the Covenant, in the event of a violation of the Covenant of the League of Nations, and a resort to force in Europe, and you referred in particular to the eventuality to the report to force in Europe, on the part of some Europe State, whether or not, that State might be a member of the League. “In reply, I invite attention to the words I used in my speech to the League Assembly on September 11. I declared that His Majesty’s Government would be second to none in the intention to fulfil, within the measure of their capacity the obligations which the Covenant lays upon them, and I added that the ideas embodied in the Covenant, and in particular, the aspiration to establish the rule of law in international affairs, had appealed with growing force to the strain of idealism in the British national character, and they had indeed become part of the national conscience. I took the opportunity to repudiate any suggestion that the attitude of His Majesty’s Government had been one of other than unwavering fidelity to the League, and all its stands for, and I draw attention to the fact that recent response of public opinion in this country, showed how completely the nation supported the Government in full acceptance of the obligations of League membership, which was the oft proclaimed keynote of their foreign policy. I added that to suggest or insinuate that this policy was for some reason peculiar to the Italo-Abyssinian conflict would be a complete misunderstanding. Nothing could, in fact be further from the truth, I said, and I sincerely welcome this opportunity to repeat with full responsibility, that it is to the principles of the League, and not to any particular manifestation thereof that the people of this country had demonstrated their adherence. Only other view would at once be an un-der-estimate of British good faith, and an imputation upon British sincerity, in conformity with its precise and explicit obligations. I .pointed out, and I re-emphasise, that the League stands, and this country stands with it, for COLLECTIVE MAINTENANCE of the Covenant in its entirety, and particularly for steady and collective resistance to all acts of unprovoked aggression. I think it will be generally agreed that no member of the League could lay down its policy in advance of any particular case likely to bring that policy into consideration, with greater clarity and decision than in those words. You will observe I spoke as I am now writing, of all acts of unprovoked aggression. Each word in that sentence must have its full value. It is at once evident that procedure under Article XVI. of the Covenant, appropriate as -regards a positive act of unprovoked aggression, is not made applicable as regard to a negative act of failure to fulfil the terms of a treaty. Further, in the case of resort to force, it is clear there may be degrees of culpability and degrees of aggression, and consequently in cases where Article XVI applies, the nature of the action appropriate to be taken under it may vary according to the circumstances of each particular case

Your Government, as I am aware, already recognises these distinctions, and similarly in regard to treaty obligations It is pertinent to recall that, as I already said at Geneva, elasticity is part of security, and that EVERY MEMBER

of the League must recognise, as the Covenant itself recognises, that the world is not static. If it be suggested this declaration of support for the principles of the Covenant embodied in my recent speech at Geneva, and reaffirmed in the present note, represents only the policy of His Majesty’s present Government, and not necessarily that of its successors in office, I may point out that while my words at Geneva were in fact spoken on behalf of the present Government of this country, those words were also spoken with overwhelming support and the approval of the people of this country. I stated at Geneva, and as has since become increasingly evident, the attitude of public opinion in the last few weeks has clearly demonstrated the fact it is moved by no variable and unreliable sentiment, but is concerned with the general principle of international conduct, to which it will firmly hold so long as the League remains an effective body. His Majesty’s Government believes that organism, which in the considered opinion of this nation, represents the one and only real hope of avoiding the senseless disasters of the past, and ensuring world peace by collective security in future, will not lightly render itself impotent by lack of faith in and refusal of effective action on behalf of its own ideals, but that faith and that action must like security be collective. The point is so vital, I must in conclusion once more quote my words at Geneva, namely that if risks for peace are to be run, they must be run by all. So long as the League preserves itself by its own example, this Government and this nation will live up to its full principles. FRENCH GOVERNMENT SATISFIED

(Recd. September 30, 2.30 p.m.) PARIS, September 29. An official message states that the Government is completely satisfied with Sir S. Iloaro’s note, and adds: Nothing could be more definite.