DRIFT TOWARDS WAR.

Grey River Argus, 28 November 1927, Page 5

DRIFT TOWARDS WAR.

1935—A CRUCIAL YEAR.

European Leaders’ Warning.

APPEAL TO BRITAIN.

TO STAND FOR PEACE.

f Ans. .and N.Z. C»He A?«mY (Received November 27 at 5.5 p.m.) LONDON, November 25.

Disarmament has overshadowed every subject in England for weeks. Lord CeaiFs statement in the Lords 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 regards 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 4 ‘No more” 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 force* 4 .

De Jouvenel, 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 yean. 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, we must be.” He conclud' 1 by expressing the opinion that in the event of another European war, America would not be on the same side as England.

General Von Schoen inch, described as the idol Vcf the German Militarist Pres' 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,” he said, “then other people must fight for them.” Signor Nitti, at the close of the conference to-night, made a fi,nal 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. ATTITUDE OF U.S.G. MUNROE DOCTRINE TO BE MAINTAINED. WASHINGTON, November 25. Mr 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 circumstances, was the only sure way for the United States to avoid embroilment in European affairs, and the constant danger of war. Mr Coolidge added: “The United States believes whatever steps are taken to 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 the background, and hopes for Borah’s’, Capper’s and Burton’s resolutions providing for the outlawr \ of war and establishment of an international tribunal, are considerably lessened. WORLD DRIFTING INTO BANKRUPTCY. (Received November 27 at 5.5 p.m.) LONDON, November 26. While De Jouvenal is forecasting a war peril in 1935, Sir George Paish is saying at Oxford that the whole 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 ar n.utting up huge tariff barriers to pr. /ejt the buying of goods outside own countries, and as a result ‘ire finding a difficulty in selling their broods in foreign markets. GENERAL STRIKE ADVOCATED. IN EVENT OF WAR. LONDON, November 26. 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 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: ‘‘lf the sacrifice of a few thousands would stop a great war, it would be right.” There was a thunderclap roar, "No!” “Neverl” Several rose and left the hall, protesting.

Von Sehoeniaek 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 bo a war on women and children in LcnAon, Paris, Berlin. We must fight to tne last against war.”