PEACE PROBLEMS

Manawatu Standard, Volume LIII, Issue 286, 31 October 1933, Page 2

PEACE PROBLEMS

CONFERENCE CONSIDERATIONS. MR DOAVNIE STEWART’S REVIEAV Per Press Association. AUCKLAND, Oct. 30. Addressing the Auckland branch of the Institute of Pacific Relations, Hon. AV. Downie Stewart said the two Canadian conferences involved no responsibility on the part of any country or Government. They were largely informative and educational. The difficulty was that, after such an exchange of views and information, it was hard for the few people forming a national delegation to impart the point of view of other nations to a whole body of their fellow countrymen when they returned home. The Conference on Empire Relations at Toronto had emerged from the earlier conference of the Institute of Pacific Relations at Kyoto. Both at Toronto and at Banff, at the heart of all the many problems discussed had been how to secure peace. At Banff the principal subject had been economic complications in the Pacific, and at Toronto everything had led up to the question of how various parts of the Empire could co-operate and consult in order to form a common policy expressed directly or through the League of Nations toward the rest of the world, in order to promote and maintain peace. “I wish to correct an erroneous impression created by a condensed cable report on some remarks I made in Canada,” he said. “It was made to appear that I had spoken disparagingly of the League of Nations, and the president of the Auckland branch of the League of Nations Union has written criticising my alleged statement. Nothing was further from my thoughts than to disparage the League. AA’hat I did say was that at Toronto sonio delegates were inclined to treat the conference as if it were entirely 1 a. League of Nations’ conference, and not primarily a conference of the members of the British Commonwealth. In fact, they spoke as if the British Commonwealth had merged its existence with the League. 1 “I said it was true that the British Commonwealth has the same objective of world peace, and must work through the League, but that the primary duty of the conference was to discuss means foi; securing co-operation and consolidation of a common Empire policy in the first place, and to recognise that the League was not yet so strongly established that we could dispense with Iho tower of strength of the British Empire. Since then Germany has withdrawn from the League, and there are now four great Powers outside the League—Japan, Russia, America and Germany: Under those circumstances we have to bo cautious, and, while giving all support to the League, still maintain the Commonwealth in case the League should fail. THE FAR EAST. “Another cable message suggested that I had been scarernongering at Banff as to the danger of war in the Pacific. Cablegrams are necessarily brief and usually state conclusions without giving tlie train of thought that leads up to them. AVhat I pointed out was that while minds were concentrated on the peril of war in Europe, it might be a fact that far more effective causes of war were operating in the Pacific. In Europe conflicts seemed to us to be based largely on old feuds and rivalries, with no economic complications as in the East. Among these complications were congestion of population, lack of opportunity for migration upon which the conference was unanimously agreed, lack of opportunity for full industrialisation and the uselessness of birth control as a remedy seeing that the surplus millions were already there.” The results of the Banff Conference had been largely negative, said Mr Stewart. The statements of fact had been clear and impartial, but there had been neither time nor opportunity to evolve a solution. This the conference had passed on to the statesmen and diplomatists of the world. At Toronto emphasis had been laid upon seeing that co-operation and consultation between various parts oi the Empire should be in accordance with llie policy of the League of Nations and toward peace. The discussions revealed a clear demarcation between the ideas of different Empire countries regarding their relationship to the Commonwealth. These differences were, in the main, geographical. Canada, which was virtually immune from attack, with the North Pole on one side and a great, powerful and friendly nation on the other, felt the necessity for defence, especially naval defence, arid co-operation, to be remote and unreal. Indeed, the feelings on this subject in the various countries might be represented by colouring a map in a gradation of tones corresponding to their vulnerability to attack. New Zealand felt herself to be in an extremely dangerous and vulnerable position, and attached great importance to her British connection and to the Navy.