GERMAN RE-ARMAMENT CONDEMNED BY LEAGUE

Horowhenua Chronicle, 20 April 1935, Page 7

GERMAN RE-ARMAMENT CONDEMNED BY LEAGUE

Duty of All to Respect Undertakings Reaffirmed. Russian Resolution Causes Alarm. (British Official Wireless) RUGBY, April 17. The resolution condemning German re-armament, submitted by France, Britain, and Italy, was carried unanimously at a meeting to-day of the League of Nations Council at Geneva, called to consider the French appeal against the German rearmament decree of March 16, The Danish representative abstained.

The resolution reaffirmed the duties of all to respect the undertakings they had contracted. It urged continuation of the negotiations initiated at the London conference with the participation of such other Powers as might usefully contribute, and it proposed the setting up of a committee to examine measures to render the covenant more effective in the organisation of collective security and to provide for the observance of those international instruments upon which peace depends.

The Council later appointed the following to serve on the committee for which the resolution provided, namely, the United Kingdom, Canada, Chile, Spain, France, Hungary, Italy, The Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Turkey, U.S.S.R., and Yugoslavia. In his speech to the Council supporting the resolution, Sir John Simon (British Minister of Foreign Affairs) said that these three Powers, the object of whose policy is the collective maintenance of peace within the framework of the League of Nations, found themselves in complete agreement in opposing, by all practicable means, any unilateral repudiation of treaties which might endanger European peace, and would act in close and cordial collaboration for this purpose of the collective maintenance of peace within the framework of the League. Not as representatives of individual nations, but as members of the League and Council had they submitted this resolution. If admitted it would be a League resolution decided on by the members of the Council in free, equal, and open consultation between themselves. Meaning of Resolution. It had three parts. First, it reaffirmed the duty of all to respect the undertakings contracted by them. Although on this occasion the Council was called upon to pronounce on the action of a particular Power they hiust apply the .proposition with equal candour to themselves, and resolve to observe this duty impartially towards all.

The second part urged the continuation of the London negotiations initiated in February not only by the Governments then participating, but by all the other Governments which had approved and encouraged those discussions. It amounted to approval by the Council of the London programme. He would be glad if the efforts they then had made were thus expressly set within the framework of the League. The third part proposed that they take steps to examine as to what measures were appropriate and practicable to render the covenant more effective in the organisation of collective security, and to provide hereafter for the more effective observance of those international obligations on which world peace specially rested. These seemed to him simple propositions well justified by the circumstances which had called them together. No Door Closed. The resolution, said Sir John, closed no door for the future. It would show that the League was ’ united in maintaining the cause for which it was founded, while all doors were left open for reaching, by fresh negotiations, that general settlement so necessary for the continued peace and future security of the world.

The most noteworthy statement before the Council was that of M. Litvinoif, Eussian Commissar for Foreign Affairs. Not specifically mentioning Germany he violently attacked “people who announced to the world a revengeful programme of unlimited foreign conquests, whereby the independence of entire States would be destroyed." He added: “What is to be done with a State that brings up people in that spirit? We are happy to have the assurance that they are ready to collaborate in ensuring the collective security of States including themselves. In the absences therefrom we are bound to draw appropriate conclusions." M. Litvinoff caused perturbation in proposing that the condemnation of unilateral treaty violations should apply to other continents than Europe, obviously hinting at Japan. Following warm intervention by Sir John Simon, M. Laval and Baron Aloisi, M, -Litvinoff withdrew his proposal.

The discussion indicated the tremendous influence of the Anglo-Franeo-Italian unity. The fact that only Denmark, for special reasons, abstained from voting is regarded as a triumph of the Stresa policy, and a lesson and a warning to Germany.

The Council concluded by paying n tribute to the British Ministers’ work during their European visits.

Policy of Complete Isolation ? NO INTERNATIONAL NEGOTIATIONS BY GERMANY THREATENED. Received Friday, 7 p.m. LONDON, April 18. The Daily Telegraph’s diplomatic correspondent at Geneva reveals that half-an-hour before the vote on the resolutiony the German Government endeavoured to secure modification of the resolution on the lines urged by Denmark —namely, the elimination of all reference to the name Germany. Word reached Geneva from Wilhelmstrasse that, if the Council adopted the resolution as it stood, Hitler would decline to enter any form of international negotiation with the other Governments. It remains to be seen whether this threat will he carried out. If it is, Germany will deliberately have adopted a policy of complete isolation. The News-Chronicle’s Geneva correspondent says that Hitler probably would have returned to the League In the autumn if a resolution less severe had been passed. The Times’ Geneva correspondent says that Germany now is unlikely to attend the Rome conference, which, probably, will result in the other Powers signing a pact of non-interference in Austria. The Rome conference also is likely to recommend the restoration of military rights to Hungary, Yugoslavia, and Bulgaria. Germany’s Indignation PROTEST TO BRITISH AMBASSADOR. 1 (British Official Wireless.) Received Friday, 7 p.m. RUGBY, April 18. Sir John Simon arrived at Hendon by air fro?!l Paris this morning on his return from Geneva. The British Ambassador in Berlin (Sir Eric Phipps) was summoned last evening by Herr von Bullow, who expressed the German Government’s indignation at the resolution passed by the League of Nations Council and Britain ’s attitude in supporting it.

German Conscription MEDICAL REQUIREMENTS DEFINED. Received Friday, 7 p.m. BERLIN, April 18. The first announcement concerning conscription consists of regulations for the medical examination, defining the requirements for the various arms. The infantry must be able to stand long marches, the cavalry wants long-legged men not weighing over 1431b5., artillerymen must be slender and strong, while motor corps recruits must be alert, good-sighted and intelligent, which are also requirements for signallers. The German Viewpoint SPANNER IN THE COGS OF EUROPEAN DIPLOMACY.

BERLIN, April 17. The Geneva resolution is regarded as a spanner in the cogs of European diplomacy, prolonging the tension. It is considered that the League has been used as an instrument of French policy there. There is resentment against Britain owing to Sir John Simon’s action ''in “condemning Germany in matters presumed to have been settled during conversations with Herr Hitler.” A strong statement of the German policy is expected before the weekend. Newspapers unanimously reject the Geneva resolution, which is regarded as a challenge. “If the League is so arrogant as to claim for itself the role of infallible judge over a beaten Germany, then Germany will find it most difficult to return to Geneva,” says the Yolkischer Beobachter. “The time has passed when a great united nation will submit to an arbitrary interpretation of international treaties.” Herr Lutze, leader of the Nazi Storm Troops, states that the new conscription law in no way eliminates the existence or purpose of Storm Troops. Nazi youth will first pass through the Hitler Youth organisation, then serve in the Storm Troops, and afterwards be drafted to the labour service organisation, which will be followed by the conscription period, after which those who have no

vocation for combative life in the Nazi service will return to the Storm Troops. The Dardanelles TURKS SPRING SURPRISE. GENEVA, April 17. The Turkish delegate unexpectedly brought up the Dardanelles question. He said that the military clauses of the Lausanne Treaty discriminated against Turkey, and in the event of the situation determined by the Neuilly Treaty (with Bulgaria) ‘ 1 being changed, ’ ’ Turkey would be bound to modify the military regime of the Straits to assure her natural defences.