THE RULES OF WAR.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 17985, 10 January 1922, Page 4

THE RULES OF WAR.

The resolutions by the Armaments Committee of the Washington Conference in regard to attacks on merchant ships and the use of poißon gas in warfare are no more than a reaffirmation of rules to which the civilised nations adhered until Germany shocked the conscience of the world by resorting to these forbidden methods. The existing law, designed for the protection of non-combatants at sea, has been elaborated in the light of the experience of Germany's unrestricted submarine campaign, and particularly to destroy the defence upon which officers of submarines relied, that they acted on the orders of officers. The resolution confirms the contention that the sinking of merchant ships, unless the crew and passengers are placed in safety, is piracy, and extends the full penalties of the laws of war to' whoever disregards this prohibition The decision in regard to poison ga* is perhaps surprising. Because of the ease with which chemical industries may be diverted to the production of poisonous liquids and gases, a great deal of attention has been devoted to the possibility of chemical warfare, and the weight of opinion has apparently been toward the conclusion that it would be impossible to prevent the use of this weapon. This view was prominent in the various reports submitted to the committee, but it was nevertheless essential that the committee should record its condemnation of a method of attack which is so utterly abhorrent to the conscience of the civilised world. While war remains possible, the world must at least strive to limit its horrors, and poison gas is universally condemned because, in the phraseology of the Hague Conventions, it inflicts "superfluous injury," its effects cannot be confined to selected targets, and in combination with aircraft, its use for the settlement of international disputes contains the possibility of destroying whole nations. Without the condemnation' of the Powers, the use of poison gas in the last war would constitute a precedent that might eventually be regarded as setting aside the original rule against such use. It is, of course, true that the acceptance of the resolution by the nations of the world will not be binding on the unscrupulous belligerent, but it can at least be said that the danger of deliberate breaches of (the rule is minimised by the fact that the association of the Great Powers for the maintenance of peace establishes a new force to compel the observance of civilised usages of war.