ABOLITION OF WAR

Hawera Star, Volume XLVII, 17 April 1928, Page 5

ABOLITION OF WAR

BRITAIN’S DECISION ON BROAD MORAL BASIS. DOMINIONS’ ATTITUDE. ,»» v, TRD PRESS ASSOCIATION—BY ELECTRIC TELEGRAPH—COPYRIGHT.) (AUSTRALIAN PRESS ASSOCIATION.) LONDON, April 16. The “Daily Telegraph’s” diplomatic correspondent says that British Official circles express the opinion that the British decision regarding Mr. Kellog’s plan for the abolition of war will be determined ,not oil technicalities, but on a broad appraisement of the political and moral values involved, and after the fullest consultation between the Home and Dominions’ governments. The latter are bound to carry the greatest weight though it is a safe assumption that as mast of the Dominions were unwilling to sign even the Rhineland Fact, Dominion opinion will be found in close agreement with Washington’s plea that the conclusion of a multi-lateral pact should not be obstructed or frustrated by claims of military alliances. The opinion is universal in British circles that renewed collaboration between America arid Europe is worth generous concessions.

MR. KELLOG’S. PROPOSAL. WARRANTS SYMPATHETIC CONSIDERATION. WHAT THE “TIMES” SAYS. (BRITISH OFFICIAL WIRELESS.) RUGBY, April 14. Newspapers publish to-day text of identic note communicated to Governments of great Powers, by the United States on the question of the possible international renunciation of war. As already stated the Note is accompanied by a preliminary draft treaty representing in a general way the form of multilateral treaty the United State’s Government is prepared to sign. The Note refers on the correspondence on the proposals with France, whose Government pointed out certain considerations which, in a multilateral treaty, must be borne in mind by Powers which are members of the League of Nations and parties to the treaties of Locarno and to other treaties g uara n tee ing non trali ty. The United States proposal is well received by the Press, and it is recognised that it warants immediate, careful and sympathetic examination. “The Times” says: “Mr. Kellog’ts proposal, as now addressed to the five Powers, has taken a much more precise and definite form than had seemed possible at the stage reached in the discussion with France alone, lt is indeed a Very remarkable fact that the United States, after long abstention from any general commitments in world politics, now submits for acceptance to the other five Powers a treaty which would bind them to absolute renunciation of war as an instrument of policy in their mutual dealings. TREMENDOUS STEP FORWARD. “If these six Powers alone found it possible to bind themselves solemnly in such an engagement after the fullest consideration of all that it would imply in the possible vicissitudes of coming years it would of course mean a tremendous step forward in the pacification of the world. The United States has generously assumed a. great responsibility in making an offer of a scope so far-reaching that the responsibility i,s shared now by those to whom the offer is formally made. The Powers are invited to commit themselves to a continuous policy of peace and definitely to put war out of consideration in their mutual intercourse, on the assumption upon which the United States Government lays great stress, that the host of lesser nations would be eager to follow so notable an example. “Since the question is so clearly put the response of the Powers must be equal to the occasion. For the British Government the task presents little difficulty. Peace, and the prevention of war, is for the whole British Empire the dominant issue. The chief commitments assumed by the British Government since the war have been assume with the object of ensuring peace and of building up alternatives to war is an instrument of policy.” Referring to M. Briand’s reference to the bearing of the League and Locarno on the proposed pact “The Times” says : “It cannot be forgotten that both the League and Locarno admit the possibility of war in a last resort as a means of retaining peace. In no sense can these remitments he regarded as implying that the States undertaking them regard war as a means of furthering their national aims. If that is admitted they art not incompatible with acceptance of the American proposal, always provided that acceptance, while apparently enlarging the scope, does not actually weaken the effect of such serious commitments as these.”

“The Times” concludes by welcoming the prospect of the great- power of the United States being brought into service in such a cause, hut it. adds: “The British conception of a solemn engagement permits of no looking back, and we must know exactly to what we are committed. If, therefore, we ask whether the renunciation of war covers purely-, defensive or police measures, whether it includes or excludes League sanctions, whether the readiness of the United States Government to sign such a treaty commits the American people in the esame degree as other .Powers would bo committed by the signature of their government, it is beoamse we are sincerely, anxious that the enterprise should succeed.”