BRITISH FOREIGN POLICY

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXX, 26 March 1936, Page 7

BRITISH FOREIGN POLICY

COLLECTIVE SECURITY Replying m the House of Commons to Mr George Lansbury’s plea for an international peace conference, Viscount Cranbourne, Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs, said that the Government was largely in agreement with Mr Laosbuiy. Where there were differences , they were differences rather of degree —he might, say of faith—than of sub-, stance. The growth of the League or Nations proved that Britain agreed with Mr Lansbury’s first statement that war was futile. Nor was there any more disagreement with his second proposition that Britain viewed with grave .concern the world-wide preparation for war. He still hoped that the time might come when a disarmament conference might achieve very good results. If the nation, last of all nations, was reconsidering the state of its armaments, the reason was not because it wanted to go to war, but localise it wanted to strengthen the forces of order against the forces of disorder. There was only one absolute and complete guarantee of peace in this world, and that was that no nation should wish to go to war. Could anyone say that that was the position now? If we could not have the ideal, the next best thing was that no nation should dare to go to war because the forces of order wre so .■

it was bound to be beaten. That was the principle of collective security.