FIGHT FOR PEACE

Gisborne Times, Volume LXXIII, Issue 11952, 24 May 1933, Page 5

FIGHT FOR PEACE

AMERICA APPROVES BRITISH PLAN. FURTHER DELAY AT GENEVA ' UNWISE. : • . , EITHER i, DISARMAMENT OR armaments race. CONFERENCE FAILURE MUST LEAD TO WAR. (British Official Wireless.) RUGBY, May 22. Th)a attitude .of the United; States towards the problems before me Disarmament Conference were revealed by Mr. Norman Davis at a meeting of the general committee at Geneva. Features of the United States pronouncement. wore the acceptance of the British plan; an undertaking to consult with other nations if the peace was threatened; a promise that if the United States concurs in the judgment of a conference of States as to an aggressor she will refrain from- any action tending to defeat the measures that may ho taken to restore peace; a willingness to particiuatc in disarmament, the supervision of such control to bo effective, automatic, and permanent; insistence on the territorial status quo; and opposition to rearmament.

In a significant passage, Mr. Davis said:— “The situation admits of no further delay. The nations must either carry out the disarmament policy adopted in 1919, or we must frankly recognise its abandonment and reconcile ourselves to reverting to an armament race, leading inevitably

to another war.” BRITAIN WELCOMES SPEECH. Sir John Simon welcomed -the speech as most encouraging and hopeful, and expressed great satisfaction at the acceptance of the draft convention. He urged that .work on a practical basis should he pressed forward. The time had come to end 'theoretical declarations and good intentions. and replace them with definite decisions. “It is now time to cash the cheques wo already have drawn.” lie said.

TACTFUL MOVE RELIEVES AWKWARD SITUATION.

An awkward situation followed Air. Henderson's acceptance of M. Boneour,s suggestions to proceed with consideration of part 1, dealing wn„ security;

Mr. Davis intervened. protesting that time should not he wasted <•»

This was disconcerting to the French who interpreted Air. Davis’ altitude to mean that they must be satisfied .with tile vague American promises of collaboration over a consultative pact, while France makes real sacrifices in material effectives. Mr. Henderson relieved the strained situation by adjourning the meeting.

Air. Arthur Henderson read a letter to the general committee from Herr Xadolny withdrawing the German amendments regarding the standardisation of Continental armies. Tho German delegate reserved tlio right to reintroduce these amendments when the plan was discussed in detail.

AMERICA GONE ALMOST TO LIMIT.

READY TO ABANDON CHERISHED NEUTRALITY

CLEAR DEFINITION OF “AGGRESSOR.” ALL DOUBTS REMOVED. (U.P.A. by Elec. Tel. Copyright) (Received Alay 23, 5.5 p.m.) GENEVA, May 23.

Mr. Davis's declarations mean that the United States is ready to forego her jealously cherished rights of neutrality, provided she concurs in the judgment deciding who is the aggressor. Mr. Davis suggested the definition of “aggressor'’ as “one

whose armed forces are found on alien soil in violation of treaties,” The commitments lie enumerated go almost the limit that might reasonably be expected from America. They do not promise everything that countries fearing to reduce their armaments would like. These countries are naturally sceptical about the value of the promise of assistance implied in the abandonment of neutrality when the promise is qualified by the phrase “If we concur” in the judgment as to the aggressor, but it is recognised that Mr. Davis's definition of “aggressor” removes the worst doubts aroused by “if”. The great merits of the speech is the plain statement exactly as to wliat America will do. European nations now know exactly whore they stand.

American circles resented M. Boncour’s speech. His suggested procedure is regarded as a “manoeuvre", but it was indicated to-night that Mr. Davis, who is anxious to expedite the proceedings, may be reconciled to the lrcnch view to-mor-row. Unofficial Americans arc disappointed that Sir Johu Simon did not more warmly pay a tribute to the declaration, showing the great departure from America’s traditional policy, but the. delegations are satisfied with the British attitude. BRITAIN’S COMMITMENTS TO TRANCE. “TERRIBLE MENACE TO EMPIRE.” BEAVERBROOK PRESS VIEWPOINT. FURTHER EUROPEAN TREATIES OPPOSED. (U.P.A. bv Elec. Tel. Copyright) (Received May 23, 5.5 p.m.) . LONDON, May 23.

• An ; editorial in the Daily Express, signed by Lord Beaverbrook,. says,. , ■ “Nothing in Mr. Davis’s speech varies or alters the French belief'

that Britain is obliged by treaties •to aid her if she, becomes involved iii I war against Germany over t}ie Polish corridor and British statesmen and newspapers are encouraging France, to rely on our commitments under these documents. It is via new and terrible menace to the Empire.. Those of,.us who are determined that Britain shall not .. participate. in ..a : new war .in Europe must promote a movement against further European entanglements. The true policy of the British is to look to the Empire, where, in collaboration with , the Dominions and colonies, there are ample resources awaiting development.” AMERICA’S NEAV ROLE. DIRECT PART IN PRESERVING WORLD PEACE. ALMOST LIKE LEAGUE ... MEAIBER. BIGGEST STEP SINCE KELLOGG PACT. PRESS COMMENT ON MR. DAVIS’S SPEECH. (U.P.A. by Elec. Tel. Copyright) (Received May 23, 7 p.m.) LONDON, May 23. Mr. Davis’s speech is generally interpreted as meaning that the’United States is prepared t-o consult other Powers in the event of a threat to peaeo ,and is willing to abandon her neutrality in regard to the proved aggressor. English and French newspapers emphasise the importance of Mr. Davis’s warning to Germany that “if a nation insists on the right to rearm, the responsibility for the failure of the conference will rest on that nation.” The News Chronicle says: “America is pledged henceforth to take a direct part in the guardianship of the peace of the world. That is.the effect of Air. Davis’s statement.” The Daily Herald says;— “The speech is the biggest step towards building an efficient peace machine since the Kellogg Pact. Air. Davis’s declaration means that the United States will support the League in imposing the sanctions of the covenant. If we can build peace machinery so that an aggressor will promptly he brought under the ban of the world, then security is achieved, and with security the willingness to disarm.” The Daily Express’ diplomatic correspondent says that America will not join in the next European war. What Mr. Davis said was that if there is trouble, and if the nations agreed as to who is the aggressor, and if America agreed on their definition, then America will refrain from hacking the aggressor against them ; in short. America will remain neutral. The Daily Telegraph’s Paris correspondent says that Mr. Davis's statement created an excellent impression. The promises of abstention from any action tending to defeat the collective efforts of other Powers is interpreted as making the United States almost like a,member of the League.

AMERICA’S POSITION MADE CLEAR. WILL STILL RETAIN FREEDOM OF ACTION. MINISTER'S EXPLANATION. (U.P.A. by Elec. Tel. Copyright) (Received May 23, 10 p.m.) WASHINGTON, May 22. The anouricement by Mr. Davis at Geneva that America is prepared to desert her isolation policy to the extent of agreeing to join a consultative pact was greeted with mixed reaction here. Replying to questions, Senator Hull, Secretary of State, applied an interpretation to the central clause of Mr. Davis’ declaration as meaning that the United States would retain her freedom of action on the decision on what sanctions, if any, should be applied against any nation declared by consultation to be the aggressor.