AGGRESSION EVIL

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22353, 26 February 1936, Page 13

AGGRESSION EVIL

THE PREVAILING FEAR METHOD OF ALLAYING TASK FOR THE LEAGUE By Telegraph—Press Association—Copyright (Received February 25, 5.5 p.m.) LONDON, Feb. 24 In the course of his speech in the House of Commons, Mr. Anthony Eden said the fear of unprovoked aggression could be eliminated only by the gradual strengthening of collective security until every nation was convinced that in no circumstances could aggression be made to pay. This was essential. In reaffirming the British Government's attachment to the League and to collective security, Mr. Eden proceeded to distinguish clearly between that policy and encirclement. He said the Government would take its full share in collective security, but would have neither lot nor part in encirclement. Its first objective must be a world-wido system of collective security embracing all nations and with its authority unchallenged and unchallengeable. But \n a true system the door must always be wide open for the entry of others. The most pressing immediate task before Britain was to bring back some measure of confidence to Europe. In order to succeed, other nations must be convinced of Britain's sincerity and her strength. Their confidence could bo gained only if Britain pursued a constant and constructive policy. Such a policy could, he believed, bo devised and followed with consistency. It would be idle to deny that there was widespread anxiety as to the future, said Mr. Eden. That anxiety was not minimised, though it was mitigated by the reflection that the course which Britain pursues in the next year or two may Well be the decisive factor. This country was firmly attached to the policy of collective security because it believed it was the policy most likely to ensure the maintenance of peace. MR. EDEN'S RETICENCE NO LIGHT ON THE ISSUE ATTITUDE OF UNITED STATES LONDON. Feb. 24 What the House of Commons wanted to know was the Government's attitude on the suggested oil sanction, but no light was thrown on that issue by Mr. Eden. He said the Government had not completed its examination of the experts' report. The addition of oil to the list has been accepted in principle by the League's Committee of Eighteen, and there is no question of revoking that decision. The committee of experts who recently examined the subject reported that if the United States were to limit her exports of oil to Italy to the normal level before 1935 an embargo could be expected to become effective in a little over three months, but that otherwise the effect of an embargo would be-limited to making the purchase of oil supplies by Italy more difficult and more expensive. The committee also indicated that a , sanction against tankers would have a supplementary effect. The debate took place only a week or so before the disclosure by the Government of its main programme for reconditioning and strengthening the national defences. This is regarded as being appropriate, since the case for that programme depends largely upon Imperial and foreign policy and international obligations under the League Covenant, the Kellogg Pact and regional agreements which Britain has undertaken and must be in a position to fulfil. WARNING TO FRANCE • OIL SUPPLIES VITAL DANGER IN AN EMBARGO (.Received February 25, 6.15 p.m.) LONDON, Feb. 24 The Daily Mail's Paris correspondent states that the Italian Ambassador, , Signor Cerutti, visited the French Foreign Minister, M. Flandin, and, according to diplomatic circles, warned him that considerable danger would attend the application of an oil sanction. Signor Cerutti also pointed out that Signor Grandi had similarly warned Mr. Eden, adding: " Italy will not consent to the safety of her armies being jeopardised by Geneva." PRESS COMMENT MR. EDEN'S POLICY MORE VEHEMENCE PREFERRED (Keceived February 25, 6.35 p.m.) LONDON, Feb. 25 The News Chronicle endorses Mr. Eden's speech as a sound statement of Britain's general policy. However, it calls attention to the vital necessity for keeping abreast of tho oil question and adds that the Government's duty at Geneva is to demonstrate that Britain intends to take the lead in enforcing the programme which the vast majority of Britons support. "We possessed but threw away America's aid when the blunder in connection with the Hoare-Laval negotiations was made," says the paper, "and subsequent vacillation has raised doubts as to our sincerity." The Daily Herald says: " Mr. Eden may* not be a good man going wrong, but he is a good man going dangerously easy. Britain prefers Mr. Eden in his vehement moods." The Times interprets Mr. Eden's speech as a statement of the Cabinet s policy as well as his own. It says Mr. Lees-Smith's suggested appeal to the United States would be rejected by a large section of the American people as an attempt by the League to saddle tho Republic with responsibilities it has consistently rejected. The League must act independently, remembering that there are other means of pressure on Italy besides through oil supplies. The settlement must be just and thorough. Geneva, on the basis of the recommendations of the Committee of Five must give Haili Selassie the full assistance of the League which the com- • mittee envisaged before the aggression ' began. The Manchester Guardian says it rei gards Mr. Eden's speech as disappoint- , ing. The export of oil to Italy ought to have been prohibited at the start.