SUPREMACY IN THE AIR.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIV, Issue 19743, 16 September 1927, Page 8

SUPREMACY IN THE AIR.

HORRORS OF WARFARE. MAINTENANCE 0£ PEACE. AN INTERNATIONAL FORCE. [ the; time not yet ripe. By Lord Thomson of Cardington, British Secretary of State for Air, 1924. If an international force of any kind should come within the scope of practical politics, in all probability it will be an air force, and for various reasons. In the first place, although only an inkling of its destructive character was afforded by the world war, sufficient is known and foreseen in regard to aerial warfare to inspire exceptional dread and ' horror. Air attack is aimed at the heart of a country; its chief objectives are great cities and industrial centres behind the backs of the defending forces on land and sea. It is in effect long range bombardment, whose victims must include a high proportion of non-combatants. It is probable that for every combatant killed ten civilians will be slaughtered in their workshops or homes. Against it, the only effective measures of defence consist in reprisals, with similar objectives. The most callous are appalled by the prospect thus opened up, and would limit the use of the new weapon if they could. In the second place, it is generally admitted that air power is better fitted to provide a strong arm for international law and justice than either military or naval power. Assuming the good faith of those who furnished the component parts of an international air force, to be held at the disposal of the League of Nations, lhat body would have at its disposal a weapon which was at once highly centralised and easily controlled. Over the greater part of Europe and North Africa, it could be used effectively, always provided that the Council of the League, once a decision had been reached, left the execution of its orders in competent hands. In Arabia, for example, the value of an air force for maintaining law and order has been amply demonstrated; so much so that a region whose inhabitants were torn by internal strife and perpetually threatened by aggressive neighbours, and where life and property were held precariously only a few years back, may shortly be admitted to the League of Nations as a sovereign independent State. The Chief Objection. Such, in brief outline, are the argument® in favour of an international air force. The chief objection to this proposal is that it is impracticable, without a profound change in the attitude of the nations toward the whole question of war. The abuse of aviation is an effect and not a cause; it is useless to attempt to limit the evil wrought by the former while leaving the latter untouched. Once war has started it becomes unlimited, and inevitably so: no rules or scruples will be operative when armed forces are fighting for national existence. Until the necessary change of spirit has come about, the critics of the suggested international air force will include both pacifists and militarists. Obviously, if it had at its sole disposal a force of this kind, the League of Nations would become a super-State. As such, it would forfeit the support of many fervent advocates of peace, some of whom pin their faith to arbitration and the protocol of 1924, others to mutual guarantees, ian international court and machinery for conciliation ; but few real pacifists would admit that peace should be maintained by any kind of force. In the eyes of the more dogmatic," war itself would be preferable to so flagrant a denial of the spirit of the League. Jealousy and Intrigue. On the other hand, the militarists would scoff at the idea that a system applied successfully in Irak could be of world-wide application. They would point out, and with reason, that, both in Europe and America, nationalism, vested interests and commercial rivalry are far more potent factors than internationalism or the desire for peace. "How," they would ask, "is it proposed to pool, and make subservient to one authority, air units so differently organised and trained and which exist for widely different purposes? In such a force, neither discipline nor efficiency would be possible, it would be a hotbed of jealousy and intrigue." And, unfortunately, they would be right. For the present, anyhow, this is not the remedy. It may be that by the development of aviation a solution of the problem will be found. Real air power can only be possessed by States with aircraft industries. The larger those industries become, the greater will be the strengtn of the States possessing them. These industries are, ana will remain, national to the extent that they depend on subsidies. Their mere existence argues a certain level of intelligence and a progressive spirit on the part of the population which maintains them. They are manned by artisans and mechanics of high class, whose political tendencies are democratic and often international. These men have nothing to gain by war and a great deal to lose; they are a solid in all industrial States, and their influence is steadily increasing. Their labour is indispensable to the conduct of modern war, and they are not likely to lend themselves to one of wanton aggression. Although they are relatively inarticulate and often misrepresented by glib, self-appointed spokesmen, if the basic idea underlying an international air force were explained to them they would welcome it. That idea is—cannot the latest and most marvellous of man's achievements in the field of mechanics be made an instrument of peace instead of adding to the armoury of war ? The Backward Countries. In point of fact, already the danger of war between industrial States is relatively remote. Ihe danger points are in the backward countries, where the possession of an important air force gives the lllr.sion of security, and, on the principle that the offensive is the best form ot defence, may become a cause of conflict. These countries are not restrained by internal conditions or post-war exhaustion, and are still quite capable of using their air forces in the hope of striking a knock-out blow, and escaping pumshni~ent by the League of Nations. To prevent this abuse of aviation is at once the duty and in the best interests of Great Powers; and the most practical way of doing so would be to agree among 'themselves to prohibit the exportation of military aircraft. This would be a step in the right direction; since, eventually, it would confine air forces to nations sufficiently developed to appreciate the uses of aviation, and deprive half-civ.lised and easily excited races of these terrible modern engines of destruction: While still it is more profitable for manufacturers and designers to produce war machines, and commercial aviation suffers in proportion, there are indications that a change of outlook is beginning. The splendid opportunities presented bv the conquest of the air are becoming more widely recognised. These may, in one sense, be a source of rivalry, but they are at the same time "a bond" of union. There is a freemasonry not only between aviators, but also between airfarers: the passengers on the air routes of the world are members of an international community, and this may jprove to, be a more permanent guarantee #f peact than-an international air force. Th# moral is clear. A little aviatioa, a little learning, is a dangerous but the more of it there i», the better for the world.