LEAGUE ASSEMBLY

Greymouth Evening Star, 2 July 1936, Page 9

LEAGUE ASSEMBLY

FRENCH PREMIER’S SPEECH

WARNING TO AGGRESSORS

[BY CABLE—PRESS ASSN. —COPYRIGHT.]

(Recd. July 2, N00n,.) GENEVA, July 1.

At the opening sitting, M. Van Zeeland deplored profoundly the regrettable incidents, and warned the galleries that if there were any disturbances, he instantly would have the offenders removed. M. Blum asked to be excused if he spoke frankly. He said he fully realised that France’s influence in European affairs had waned since he assumed' power. The recent strikes and the occupation of the Rhineland gave the impression that France was declining, but public opinion was wrong. There was never the slightest possibility of the strikes leading to civil war. The occupation of the Rhineland was wrongly interpreted to mean that France was tolerating anything. On the contrary, France had not mobilised, as she remained loyal to Locarno and the League, but if the soils of France or those to which France had obligations were violated, France’s reply would be different. The strikes should not be taken as a sign of French weakness in the face of possible aggression. The atmosphere, never before so heavy, was rendered still more oppressive on account of the mystery in certain countries regarding rearmament. War was considered’ a definite possibility, for the first time in eighteen years. The most alarming symptoms had been the growing impression that countries were ignoring pacts and obligations to gain advantage over those faithful to covenants. “Shall we be able to resist the success of those discarding their obligations?” he asked. “My Government denies that war is a legitimate method of settling international disputes. France wants peace, but will not remain silent before force, or recognise victories gained by force. The League has certainly experienced failure, and has proved powerless to stop aggression, or to end a war of aggression, but this is not due to the faulty drafting of the Covenant, but the uncertain and belated application of it. France will not permit the weakening of the League. On the contrary, she is prepared' to consider any scheme to tighten up the Covenant, and will not spare any effort to restore international confidence.

M. Blum concluded with an exhortation for general disarmament, by means of progressive reduction.

M.Blum’s speech was disappointing, and was regarded over-idealistic and addressed to Germany in language she does not comprehend. M. Blum barely mentioned the Abyssinian problem. , M. Solis (Panama) • wound up the morning session of the Assembly by declaring that the international law coqld not progress more rapidly than civilisation.

BRITISH ATTITUDE.

MR. EDEN’S SUMMARY.

[BRITISH OFFICIAL WIRELESS]

RUGBY, July 1. The attitude ot the British Government towards the question before the League of Nations at Geneva, was defined by Mr. Eden, in the Assembly. No one present, he said, could contemplate with any measure of satisfaction the circumstances in which the Assembly met. The occasion was painful to all, but it was more than necessary, in the interests of every member of the League, and so far as the application of sanctions in the Italo-Abyssinian dispute was concerned. Members of the League had, in common, applied certain economic and financial measures which they were in a position to impose, and which they thought could be made effective by their own acts alone. “Yet we are all conscious that these measures failed to fulfil the purpose for which they were imposed. It' is not that the measures in themselves have been without effect, but that conditions in which they were expected to operate have not been realised. The course of military events, and the local situation in Abyssinia, brought us to a point at which the Sanctions in force were incapable of reversing the order of events in that country. Had the British Government any reason to beneve that the maintenance of the existing Sanctions, or even the addition of other economic measures, would re-establish the position in Abyssinia, then they would be prepared to advocate such a policy, if the other members of the League agreed to join in its application. The British Government finds it impossible to entertain any such beliefs. In our view, it is only military action that could now produce this result. I cannot believe that, in the present world conditions, such military action could be considered a possibility. Realities have to be recognised. The continuance of the Sanctions at present in force can serve no useful purpose. At the same time, it is the view of the British Government that this Assembly should not, in any case, recognise Italy’s conquest over Abyssinia. Moreover, if the harsh realties of the situation must influence our attitude towards the measures we adopted, they cannot, in our judgment, involve any modification of the view expressed of Italy’s action by 50 members of the League, last Autumn. There remains the all-impor-tant subject of the League’s future. Are we to say, because we failed on this occasion to make the rule of law prevail over the rule of force, that we are therefore finally to abandon ’ this object? Certainly not. With such . an objective as this before us, our . endeavour must be centred upon the • task of reconstruction. It is.' however, clear that the lessons of the last few months must be embodied in . practice. As regards the immediate . future of the Assembly’s work, His Majesty’s Government is ready to join . at any time in any work which this Assembly, or any other organisation of the League, decides shall be undertaken. It may be at some preliminary exchanges of views on the subject of the League’s future can usefully take place during the pre- > sent session, but it is essential that all countries should have time and i sufficient f o consider in •.detail the problem that confronts i the’-’. Th«re must, however, be no I avoidable delay, and I suggest, there-

[fore, that the time to get to grips I with this problem should be at the Assembly in September.” SOUTH AFRICA & SANCTIONS. (Recd. July 2, 1 p.m.) x GENEVA, July 1. At the resumption of the Assembly in the afternoon, M. Te Water said: South Africa cannot subscribe to -a declaration to the world which would shatter for generations international confidence and all hope of realising world peace. South Africa is prepared to maintain Sanctions, which course alone will maintain the. League as an instrument of security to its members.

Mr Massey said the Canadian Government’s view was that the continuance of ineffective economic pressure would not secure the original objective.

Mr Eden said the Emperor’s appeal must have evoked the sympathy of everyone. The occasion was painful for all.

M. Litvinoff affirmed that the Sanctions Article, if fully applied, could' stop any aggressor, but at the outset of the Italian aggression there were attempts to limit its scope. Economic Sanctions must be obligatory on all members, and should be accompanied by military Sanctions.

M. Litvinoff, presumably alluding to Germany, referred to “the actions and statements of one European ■ State, whose aggressive intentions leave no room for doubt, and indeed are openly proclaimed by that State itself,” as indicating an accelerated rate of preparation for aggression in more than one direction. The Assembly adjourned.

SMALLER STATES & COVENANT.

GENEVA, July 1.

A meeting of the Scandinavian States, Spain and Switzerland, issued a communique stating: “The aggravation of the international situation raises the question whether obligations under the Covenant still exist. It is admissible that certain articles of the Covenant, especally those relating to disarmament, remain a dead letter, while others are applied. We are willing to examine amendments to the Covenant, but the reform of the League without such amendment is preferable.” Official circles interpret the communique as meaning that unless Sanctions are made more efficacious the signatories will refuse to participate in future Sanctions.

JOURNALISTS’ OUTBURST.

LONDON, July 1

The “Daily Telegraph’s” Geneva correspondent says: M. Avenol has withdrawn all their Press cards from the Italian journalists arrested, and they will never be allowed to set foot in the League building again. The arrested include Signor Eugenio Morreale, a special correspondent of “Popolo d'ltalia”, Signor Mussolini's own paper. The Italian Foreign Office is protesting against the arrest of the Italian journalists. The “Chronicle’s” Rome correspondent says Selassie’s speech riled Italian opinion, the newspapers heaping abuse on him, and calling him a deserter.

POLICE PRECAUTIONS

(Recd. July 2, 8 a.m.). GENEVA. July 1.

In consequence of yesterday’s disturbances, the police took special precautions to exclude possible demonstrators from the League galleries this morning.

The Italian journalists spent the night in the cells. It is expected that they will be expelled from Switzerland. The Italian Press describes the incident as the “inevitable. consequence of the provocation the presence of the Negus had given.” “Messagero” indignantly denounces tjie violence and brutality shown to the journalists for a legitimate protest FRENCH OPINION. PARIS, July 1. The French Press unanimously de'plores the journalists’ behaviour, and also considers that the Emperor’s speech created a distressing impression. “Le Journal” declares it was the most humiliating speech ever heard by Anglo-French Governments, and was especially humiliating to France. DEMAND FOR RELEASE (Recd. July 2, 1 p.m.). GENEVA, July 1. Signor Scoppa informed M. Motta that unless the Italian journalists were immediately released the tension between Italy and the League would become more acute. MINISTER’S RECOMMENDATION ROME. July 1. The Italian Minister of Propaganda, sent the journalists a message of sympathy and support for those who were imprisoned as malefactors for showing unrestrainable disdain in the face of a grave insult to a country which was guilty only of bringing its age-old civilisation to a barbarian empire.

EXPULSION AS PENALTY.

(Received July 2,2 p.m.) GENEVA, July 1.

The Swiss Government has decided not to prosecute the journalists who tried to whistle down Selassie, but to conduct them to the frontier, and expel them from Switzerland for the duration of the Assembly. The Italian Minister protested, and requested that they be given a reasonable interval before th'3 expulsion, and that the point to which they will be conducted will be the nearest to Italy.

At present they are comfortable in the prison station, consuming quantities of macaroni.

ARGENTINE’S PROTEST.

GENEVA, June 30.

The Argentine delegates vigorously protested against the recognition of territorial changes resulting from force. Ha said such changes were not recognised by America. If the principle were not observed, Argentina would be obliged to reconsider its colwith the League.

SELASSIE’S RETURN.

LONDON, July 1.

A dramatic question with, which Selassie ended his speech was: “What reply have . I to take back to my people?” ' This confirms reports that he intends to return to Abyssinia. The "Daily Herald’. l ” din l omat’*c correspondent says he will travel via Egypt, and the Sudan “nd /.hat the British Government will put no ob-

stacles in his way. The Abyssinian delegation at Geneva announces that Selassie received a communication from Gore, stating the Abyssinian army was reorganised.

FRONTIER POST

[BRITISH OFFICIAL WIRELESS]

RUGBY, July 1.

Lord Cranborne, in the Commons, was asked whether the Foreign Secretary's attention had been called to the occupation by the Italians of Moyalo, which was a town shown as being in Kenya, Colony. He replied that there were two places called Moyalo, one in Kenya and the other in Abyssinia. It might be that the Italian forces-Had occupied Moyalo in Abyssinia. There was no reason whatever to suppose that they had occupied Moyalo in Kenya, which was, moreover, a military post.

ITALY AND EGYPT.

(Recd. July 2, 10.30 a.m.). LONDON, July 1

In the Commons, Lord Cranbourne finally disposed of M. Mtfnder’s renewed inquiry, by stating that no plans relating to an Italian attack on Egypt, came into possession of the Government in the mid-summer of 1935.