U.K. Ratifies Charter Plan

Northern Advocate, 24 August 1945, Page 7

U.K. Ratifies Charter Plan

(Rec. 1.40 p.m.) LONDON, Aug. 23

Both the House of Lords and the House of Commons, after lengthy debates, tonight unanimously ratified the United Nations’ Charter. The Lords approved the measure after Lord Strabolg'i (Labour) had declared that the Charter would eventually have to be replaced by something more "rogue proof.’’ Science For Peace “It is the Government’s aim, in world organisation, that we should eliminate the desire to exploit the discoveries of science for war and turn them into channels where they can serve humanity,’’ declared Mr. Ernest Bevin in the House of Commons, winding up the United Nation’s Charter debate. He added that the advent of the atomic bomb and other forms of explosives made it apparent that in future statesmen would have to be more conscious of the necessity of making the World Organisation operate. than of merely formulating rules. It was not only the atomic bomb but the whole advance of science in the field of war which must be controlled. This was the World Organisation’s task.

Policy made wars, not intentions alone. It was the Government’s duty to try to ensure that the policy which Britain and the world followed did not 'lead back to war. They had to remove the intention to go to war and direct the mind of collective governments to the ideal of peaceful settlement, based on economic and social justice. He had been asked: ‘‘Why not give the secret of the atomic bomb to the Big Three?” His answer would be: “To whom are we to give the secrets, merely to three, to five or to the World Organisation? I think we must postpone consideration of this question until the World Organisation has been established and we can see clearly liow the matter stands.” To Serve Human Advancement Mr. Bevin added that they must aim at turning the attention of the peoples of the world towards the immense powers of modern science to serve human advancement. Scientists did not set out to split the atom for the purposes of war. He was perfectly certain that the New Zealander, the late Lord Rutherford, had not any idea of war, only a scientific curiosity in order to master the forces of nature. Mr. Bevin concluded: “I should like to see the Charter placed in every church, parish hall, trade union branch and wherever the public assembles in order to remind them of their moral obligation to back international law.’’

The resolution moved by Mr Attlee In the House of Commons, that the United Nations Charter be ratified by Britain, forms the subject of most of the leading parties ia the London newspapers today. The comment takes the form of appreciation of the world position in the light of recent events and discoveries.

“The Times” says: “New developments of warfare culminating in a new distribution of world power and in the coming of the atomic bomb have given the new organisation a universality to which the old League of Nations aspired but never really attained. The siupreme test of its efficacy is as likely to come in Asia as in Europe; in the Pacific of; in the Atlantic.

“The same cogent reason deprives the smaller nations of the right of veto which the unanimity rule of the Covenant of the League of Nations conferred on them. The irrefutable lesson of experience proves that, save for altogether exceptional circumstances, the smaller nations are inextricably involved in the fortunes of their larger neighbours and must, within the limit of their resources, play an active and co-operative part in the business of security. To Art, Not Judge “The new Charter makes no attempt to define aggression or to lay down rules by which the action of member States may be adjudged legitimate or illegitimate. The weight of responsibility for decisions rests on the more or less unfettered discretion of the Security Council, in which the authority of the principal nations will necessarily remain predominant. The principal nations alone possess the power of enforcement—a fact which explains and justifies the veto accorded them in the Charter. „ . ~ “The mandate of the Security Council, the newspaper concludes, “is no longer to sit in judgment, but to take action in any situation which appears to it to threaten the maintenance of- peace and security throughout the world.” The “Daily Telegraph” says: “Whether it will prevent war altogether no one. as Viscount Cranborne said in the House of Lords, can be certain, but it certainly does provide means by which war can be prevented. if the nations of the world are willing to prevent it. “All nations, even the strongest, have been taught in these grim six years that no one can stand secure alone. Territorial and political security is unobtainable without economic security, and no nation, however great its resources, can now be prosperous apart from the rest of ; the world We arc all members one of another. Through the spirit and principles which form the United Nations Chartei, the world may hasten its approach to that general welfare which alone can ensure the victory won by the men who fought and died for it.”