DEFINITION AT GENEVA

Hawera Star, Volume LIV, 12 September 1935, Page 6

DEFINITION AT GENEVA

Prevention of War by Collective Means Supported OBLIGATIONS UNDER COVENANT “ALL MUST RUM RISKS” (British Official Wireless.) Received 2.30 p.m. to-day. RUGBY, Sept. 11. _ Tlie British Foreign Secretary, Sir Samuel Hoare, speaking at tlie League of Nations assembly, said the delegates were there as members of a collective organisation, each pledged by certain obligations and each anxious to safeguard the future of the world by collective action in the cause of peace and progress. In spite of any national faults and failings, he believed that British public opinion had usually shown sound instinct on big issues, and usually iu moments of crisis had expressed itself with firmness, justice and commonsense. British public opinion was firmly behind the League when it was founded. The British people supported the League for no selfish motive. They had seen that the old system of alliances was unable to prevent world war and they wished to find a more effective instrument foi peace. They were deeply and genuinely moved by a great ideal, and in spite of experiences in the past the British people had clung to their ideal, and they believed that collective security founded on international agreements was the most effective, safeguard of peace, and they would be gravely disturbed if the new instrument that had 1 been forged were blunted or destroyed. “It whs necessary, however, not only to have an ideal, but also to consider what were the best measures for achieving it, but in determining the conditions in which the council was working they must first clear their minds as to what the League was, and what it was not,” continued Sir Samuel. “It was not a super state, nor even a separate entity existing of itself, independent of or transcending the states which make up its membership. If it succeeded it was because its members, in combination with each other, would give power to apply the principles of the Covenant. If it failed it would be because its members lacked either the will or the power to fulfil their obligations.” THE WHOLE COVENANT Proceeding, Sir Samuel Hoare discussed the collective security organisation, peace and the prevention of war by collective means. It meant much more than what were commonly called sanctions; it meant the whole Covenant. It assumed a scrupulous respect for - all treaty obligations. Its foundation was a series of fundamental obligations accepted by members to submit every dispute likely to lead to war to peaceful methods of settlement according to procedure provided by the Covenant. Two pi-ineipal conditions in which the system of collective security was designed to operate were, firstly, that members should have reduced their armaments to the lowest point consistent with national safety, and the enforcement by common action of international obligations; and secondly, that the possibility was open through machinery of the League for a modification by consent and by peaceful means of international conditions whose continuance might be a danger to peace. To complete the system there was normally an obligation to take collective action to bring war to an end in the event of any resort to war in disregard of the Covenant obligations. Underlying these obligations was an expectation that this system be subscribed to by the universal world of sovereign states, or by far the greatest part of it. The whole system was the most inspiring conception in the history of mankind. Its realisation, however, could not be easy, even in the most favourable circumstances. UNFAVOURABLE CIRCUMSTANCES Sir Samuel Hoare proceeded to refer to some unfavourable circumstances at the present time, and the much more grievous burden which, in consequence, lay upon faithful members to preserve

what had been, won in the struggle for the organisation of peace. Still, the obligations of the Covenant remained. Their burden had been increased many fold, but one thing was certain, that if the burden was to be borne it ,must be borne collectively. If the risks for peace must be run they must be Tun by all. “On behalf of His Majesty’s. Government I can say that they will be second to none in their intention to fulfil within the measure of their capacity the obligations which the covenant lays upon them,” said foir tsamuel. r ‘ It is in accordance with what we believe to be the underlying principles of the League that our people have stoadily promoted, and still promote, the growth of self-govern-ment in their own territories. It was, for example, only a few weeks ago that I was responsible for helping to pass through the Imperial Parliament the great and complicated measure for extending the self-government of India” * Reverting to the British attitude towards the League, and to the sincerity of ideals that inspired it, Sir Samuel Hoare admitted that, while sincerity springs from enlightened self-interest, it also springs from enlightened interest in what they believe best for all. By way of illustration, he chose a question which he said was exercising'the minds of many people and many Governments —the problem of the world’s economic resources and the possibility of making bettor use of them in the .nature. PECULIAR ADVANTAGE. “ Abundant supplies of raw materials appear to give a peculiar advantage to the countries possessing them. It is easy to exaggerate the decisive character of such an advantage, for there are countries which, having little or no natural abundance, have made themselves prosperous and powerful by industry and trade, yet the fact remains that some countries, either in their native soil or in their colonial territories, so possess what appear to be preponderant advantages that others, less favoured, view the situation with anxiety, especially as regards colonial raw materials. It is not unnatural that such a state of affairs should give rise to a fear lest exclusive monopolies be set up at the expense of those countries that do not possess colonial empires. It is clear that in the view of many this is a real problem. We should be foolish to ignore it. It may be that it is exaggerated; it may be also that it is exploited for other purposes. None the less, as a question causing discontent and anxiety, the wise course is to investigate it to see what the proposals are for dealing with it, and to see whatis the real scope of the trouble and, if the trouble is substantial, to try and remove it. The view of His Majesty’s Government is that the problem is economic rather than political and territorial; it is the fear of monopoly —of the withholding of essential colonial raw materials that is causing alarm. My impression is that there is no question in the present circumstances of any colony withholding its raw material from any prospective purchaser. On the contrary, the trouble is that they cannot be sold at | remunerative prices. This side of the question was investigated with a concrete result by the commission on monetary and economic conference which met in London in 1933. Its work was directed primarily towards raising wholesale prices to a reasonable level through co-ordination if production and marketing, but one of the stipulations of such action -was that it be fair to all parties, both producers and consumers; that it should not aim at discrimination against any partciular country, and that it should, as far as possible, be worked with the willing co-operation of consuming interests in importing countries. This precedent may indicate a suitable line of approach to the enquiry which should be limited in this case to raw materials from colonial areas, including protectorates and mandates. I suggest that emphasis in the terms of the reference should fall upon a free distribution of such raw materials among the industrial countries which lequire them, so that all fear of exclusion or a monopoly may be removed once and for all. The Government I represent will, I know, be prepared to take their share in any collective attempt to deal in a fair and effective way with a problem that certainly is troubling many people at present, and maj- trouble them even more in future. ’’