SECURITY PROBLEM

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLVIII, Issue 45, 20 January 1928, Page 7

SECURITY PROBLEM

BRITISH MEMORANDUM

DISPUTE AND ARBITRATION

LOCARNO TREATIES IDEAL TYPE OF AGREEMENT.

(By Electric Telegraph.—Copyright.) RUGBY, Jan. 18. In accordance with the agreement reached at the December meeting of the Security sub-committee of the Preparatory Committee on Disarmament, that tiio Governments represented should submit, before the next meeting, observations on the suggested programme of work before the sub-com-mittee, the British Government has submitted a memorandum on the subject to the League Secretariat. This commentary, which is of considerable length and deals seriatim with items of the suggested agenda, has now been issued.

Dealing with arbitration treaties in general, the document emphasises that it is not the rendering of a decision that is important, but the acceptance and executions of its terms. It is because it is so generally felt that there are some questions which no country could safely submit to arbitration that it lias been usual to make reservations limiting the extent of obligation to arbitrate. POSSIBLE PROGRESS.

The lines along which progress seem possible toward the universal acceptance of unrestricted obligations to arbitration of justifiable disputes even by States which cannot now accept such an obligation are

(1) By the inclusion in particular treaties of an undertaking to arbitrate disputes arising out of their interpretations; and (2) By widening the scope of agreements dealing with justifiable disputes generally and pledging parties in advance to submit such disputes to arbitration. In numerous cases Britain has already applied this procedure.

The document says: “It may well be that the formula as to ‘vital interests, honour, independence, and interests of third States’ first adopted in arbitration treaties a quarter of a century ago requires re-examination. YV hatever changes may be recommended, however, it is clear that some limitations in the scope of a treaty of this kind are essential.

“Disputes, legal in their nature, may arise between two States with regard to matters falling exclusively within the domestic jurisdiction of one of thorn. , , “No State can agree to the submission to an international tribunal of matters falling exclusively within the range of its national sovereignity.” BILATERAL AGREEMENTS. The view is expressed that more progress is likely to be achieved through bilateral agreements than through general treaties. Noil-justifiable disputes, states the document, are less suitable for submission to a tribunal with power to give a binding decision, and the procedure of comciliation as provided under the League Covenant is in such' cases alone possible at present. Regarding security agreements it is recalled that the Locarno Trea-y was designed to meet a specific danger in a specific area, and imposes on all the parties concerned equal obligation to preserve its integrity and to execute the decisions of the League Council. It is in this way far more efficacious than could be any more genoral system of guarantees under which the obligation would be spread over a much longer number of States, each or which would be inclined quite naturally to regard its individual obligation as being pro tanto reduced. LOCARNO TREATY.

The British Government is of opinion that the Locarno Treaty, by virtue of the extent to which it is devised to meet a specific danger and by its character and clarity of definition, constitutes the ideal type of security agreement. Yet notwithstanding the hope expressed by the League Assembly that the principles embodied in the Treaties of Locarno “will be put into practice as soon as possible by all States in whose interests it is to contract such treaties,” no further treaties on this model have been registered with the League. In the same connection the League' Council also placed its offices at the disposal of all States desirous of “concluding suitable agreements likely to establish conndenoe and security,” but not one State has yet accepted the offer. NETWORK OF GUARANTEE.

“The British Government looks forward to the gradual growth of this system, convinced as it is that the easiest way of attaining a universal sense of security is for each State to provide itself with the necessary guarantees in that quarter where its main interests and, consequently, its principal danger lie. If the system is gradually extended until it includes every State which feels that its security is not already amply safeguarded, there will eventually be woven a network of guarantees against the rupture of peace in any part of the world. Such local guarantees directed to a specific danger and based on well-defined obligations are infinitely more satisfactory than any comprehensive or universal scheme, which must necessaiiß be drawn in more vague and more general terms, and of which consequently the modus operandi and probable efficacy must remain to some extent a matter of speculation, If States which, owing to any doubt or suspicion hesitate to open negotiations were mutually to agree to place themselves in the hands of the League Council and to conduct their conversations under its auspices, the conclusion of furthei agreements on the lines recommended would be greatly facilitated.” —British official wireless.