The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 15, 1928.

Hokitika Guardian, 15 August 1928, Page 2

The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 15, 1928.

THE PACT AND AFTERWARDS Tiie ‘‘outlawry of war” pact is still engaging diplomatic attention in Europe and America, hut there are indications that all is not plain sailing for it. A few days ago Mr Kellogg confessed that he was ‘‘discouraged” by the tone of the British Foreign Minister's suggestion that in any case the United States “might !>e expected actively to support the anti-war treaty in any emergency.” This evidently carried to Mr Kellogg’s sensitive ear a hint of those “foreign entanglements" which are so feared and detested by American politicians. But there are other reasons, considers an exchange, for the somewhat half-hearted welcome accorded in certain quarters to Mr Kellogg’s proposals. The Americans may not remember, but the rest of tho world can hardly afford to forget, that when President Wilson, speaking for the United States, had accepted the League of Nations and its Covenant the American Parliament repudiated it, and though Mr Kellogg is no doubt quite sincere himself, he cannot guarantee the future action of tho American Government. The Senate alone has the power to ratify treaties, and it has in the past exercised its right of rejection very freely. But quite apart from this there are the coming elections to consider. Supposing the Democrats gain office—can they be expected to adopt with any enthusiasm a policy framed and promulgated by a Republican Minister and endorsed by their bitter enemies? Me may give Mr Kellogg credit for tho best possible intentions, and yet express some .polite doubt whether it would be judicious of Britain and the other members of the League of Nations to commit themselves unreservedly to his programme. But while the outlook for the Kellogg Pact is perhaps less promising than it was, hope has revived for a closer and more amicable understanding between France and Britain in regard to preparations for war and the maintenance of peace. Ever since France at the Washington Conference bluntly refused to agree to the abolition of submarines Britain has •been striving to arrange some sort of compromise with her that would promote military as well as naval disarmament. Until quite recently the French Government, which is justifiably resentful of the charges of “militarism’’ and “Imperialism” brought against it, has simply declined to enter into the details of its naval equipment with f<d>

cign Powers. But now this difficulty has been got over, and Sir Austen Chamberlain has boon able to inform the House of Commons that an arrangement for the readjustment of both naval and military forces has been entered into between the two countries. France is prepared to communicate to Britain nil the particulars of her naval programme, and Britain is prepared to concede France the right to strengthen her military establishment if she reduces her fleet still further. This is in itself very satisfactory, hut lucre is something even .more important in the background. According to what appears to be a semi-official statement, the net result of these negotiations will be that France and Britain will return virtually to tho position in which they stood before the Great War, giving each other their full confidence and l>eing prepared to co-operate in any great emergency that may arise. If this is literally true, France will be at last be adequately compensated for the loss of the protection that was to have been afforded her by Britain and the United States in accordance with the post-war compact subsequently repudiated by the Americans. This will, of course, benefit France, but in general opinion it will be vastly beneficial to Britain as well.