SOVIET PEACE PLAN

Hawera Star, Volume XLVII, 24 March 1928, Page 5

SOVIET PEACE PLAN

ONLY ONE SUPPORTER

LITVINOFF ANNOYED.

AT BRITISH DENUNCIATION

BY CABLE —PRESS ASSOCIATION-COPYRIGHT GENEVA, March 22.

At. Litvinoff’s annoyance at Lon! Gushendun 's scathing denunciation of the Soviett’s proposals for peace by disarmament was evident in the fact char, he devoted, at the disarmament conference to-day, the greater pant of his reply to an attack on the British policy. He said with regard to Lord Cushendun’s demand whether .Russia had changed her policy of interfering in the internal affairs of others, that he would draw attention to the presence of British troops and fleets in Chinese cities and ports, and also to tihe recent notes to Persia. He countered Lord Cuwhendun’s question about fomenting civil war with the statement that he might refer to the existence in many countries of an organisation or bureau of Russian emigrants which forge documents against the Soviets. One of these, known as the Zinovieff letter, was already historic in England. ,

M. Litvin-off declared that the British and others had done nothing to settle questions which rendered it impossible for the Commission to underrake the second reading of the Soviet 's project. This might well be described as sabotage. Nevertheless the Soviet, though it had no intention of joining the League, was determined to take a most active part in tihe work of the Commission. When other nations failed in taking the initiative in disarmament the Soviet would take it. That was why they presented the project. It would be a blessing if the Commission would agree to the -abolition of rrmiamenits, continued M. Litvin off. They should be willing to sacrifice the articles of tihe covenant standing in llhc way. He reminded the Commission that the -Soviet had never made war on anyone. It was a fact that the Soviet had no obligation under the covenant, and her express wish to participate in the League’s efforts should be sufficient proof of her sincerity. Tic again asked acceptance of tihe principle of total disarmament. If it was accepted they could study it article by article. If it was rejected he would not. ask for further consideration.

M. CTauzel pointed out that the declarations -of the. delegates left no doubt of their attitude. Out ot nineteen speakers, only Count BernstorfT (Germany) supported the Soviet plan. M. LitvinofT apparently wanted martyrdom but he should be satisfied with the number of darts received. What the League wanted was to end all war, civil and international.

M. Clauzel concluded by seconding 1.-ard Gush on dun’s proposal that the Soviet plan be referred to the Governments and that in the meantime a meeting be convoked before the September assembly for the purpose of thy second reading of the Commission’s draft of the disarmament project, in connection with which the Powers were now in agreement on the disputed

points. Tlhe feeling in tih-e lobbies is that M. Lit. vino T’s oration was another propaganda effort, the Soviet at t-.'ie present. evidently being anxious to keep in touch with the rest of the world through disarmament and economic conferences.

FORGET GENEVA FAILURE

LADY ASTOB’S ADVICE

LONDON, March 22

A recent letter to the Press, which referred to the discussion in the Catbi not on the Geneva eonferene, .was unusual, said the First Lord of tille Admiralty, Mr W. G. Bridgemuan, in reply to a question asked by Lord Cecil in t'he House of Commons to-day. Mr P.rid'geman added that he did no't propose to violate the secrecy of Cabinet discussions. 'The British proposals were eventually rejected a't Geneva, not over the question of 8-incih guns but over that of the total tonnage. Would it not be better to forget Geneva and look forward' to the next cenference, asked Lady A s'tor. Mr Bridgemaii agreed, believing as he did that Great Britain and the United States were not thinking for a moment of any kind of aggressive war fare. They might hope, if feelings were not aroused and mischief done between the two countries, that with the foundations laid at Geneva some satisfactory limitation might be agreed upon in the nrit distant, future.

MENTIONED BY INDEPENDENT LABOUR PARTY.

FULL PUBLICITY ADVOCATED

Received 10.45 p.m. to-day. LONDON, March 23

The annual report of the council of the Independent Labour Party at the Norwich conference says: The bold Soviet proposals to the League have given a great impeths to the discussion of international disarmament. The partv should do its utmost to inform public opinion of the importance of the proposals, thus compelling the League to adequately consider the matter.—A.P.A. and “Sun.”