Manawatu Evening Standard. WEDNESDAY, DEC. 14, 1932. THE DISARMAMENT CONFERENCE.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIII, Issue 14, 14 December 1932, Page 8

Manawatu Evening Standard. WEDNESDAY, DEC. 14, 1932. THE DISARMAMENT CONFERENCE.

There is cause for deep satisfaction that the representatives of Great Britain, the United States, France, Germany and Italy have evolved a formula under which Germany will re-enter the Disarmament Conference. Her claim for “equality of armaments” with other Powers was followed with a determined refusal to attend the Bureau or Executive meeting of the Conference, until the right was recognised. The Foreign Minister (Baron von Neurath) declared that it we.s not a question of Germany wanting to arm, but of other countries refusing to disarm. The inference was obvious, and Great Britain and Italy bent their energies to bring France and Germany into conference with them to settle the question at issue. A dispute arose, unfortunately, as to a suitable venue, France refusing to go to London and Germany to Geneva. While matters were in a'state of flux, Sir John Simon made the important announcement of Great Britain’s policy, which contained the suggestion that in meeting Germany’s claim for equality of status the European States should solemnly affirm that, under no circumstances, would they resolve differences between themselves by resorting- to force. Briefly, it was proposed that the one disarmament convention should also limit Germany’s armaments, thus superseding* the essential clauses in the Versailles Treaty, the restrictions to last for . the same period, and to be subject to the same methods of revision as for other countries. With regard to Germany’s desire that the principle should be acknowledged that the kinds of arms permitted to other countries ought not to be prohibited to her, Sir John Simon said that, if the principle of equality were to be conceded, this could not be denied, but an agreement could only be reached after discussions at Geneva. Britain’s policy was held to be a considerable advance by Germany, and British statesmanship has without doubt played the greatest part in bringing Germany back into the Conference.

That conditions suitable to both France and Germany have been accepted, after the four Powers, together with the United States, had agreed to meet at Geneva, is a consummation which should pave the way to some measure of achievement in the cause of disarmament for which the whole world is waiting* anxiously, realising* that reliet from this tremendous burden is imperative. Under the agreement Germany’s equality rights are to be embodied in any convention to be reached limiting armaments. The application of equality rights will be a matter for the Conference itself. The signatories have also resolved to co-operate in achieving a substantial measure of disarmament now, and in the future, and also affirm their readiness not to resort to force when disputes arise. This is on all fours with Britain’s policy as enunciated by Sir John Simon. The way is now paved for the full Conference to proceed. The United States delegate (Mr N. Davis) has produced a plan which Britain, France and Italy are said to favour, providing for an immediate convention

recording the Bureau’s agreement as to the limitation of various forms of warfare. This convention, it is suggested, should run unfil 193 G when the naval agreements in force expire, the Disarmament Conference to stand adjourned till then. The convention would contain provisions limiting land gun calibres and the size of tanks, abolishing bombing by air, gas, bacteriological and incendiary warfare, and reducing effectives by one-third. The practical application of .the convention’s principles will be a matter for the Permanent Commission to devise, and this body, if the American proposal is agreed to, will be charged with the dxity of preparing for the resumption of the Conference in 1930. In view of the resolution passed last July, which Germany and Russia opposed because it did not go far enough, under which it was agreed that certain forms of warfare should be abolished and severe restrictions placed upon heavy armaments, the convention now suggested is likely to be accepted as a confession of failure. Certainly, it seems a poor result when recognition is given to the great hopes placed upon the Conference. But disarmament can only be advanced by stages, for the'problem is most intricate, and however small the achievement it is at least a step further towards the goal for which the nations should be striving wholeheartedly.