PACIFIC PROBLEMS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXIII, Issue 22538, 1 October 1936, Page 18

PACIFIC PROBLEMS

liECENT CONFERENCE

CONCLUSIONS REACHED NATIONS' VIEWS SUMMARISED Conceded to be the most notable of the biennial conferences begun in 1925. the sixth meeting of the Institute of Pacific, flotations came to h close after two weeks of searching for a formula for peace in the Pacific area, states Mr. John Thompson, foreign news editor of the San Francisco News.

Although the search was in vain and some delegates sensed an attitude of defeatism in the final discussions, the general'impression was that much had been accomplished by airing the dangers and complexities of the Pacific situation and sending delegates back to their own countries aware of the problems confronting their neighbouring nations.

Final summaries of national points of view wore presented .at the final plenary session, at which key men of the British, French, Russian and Japanese delegations spoke. They were M. Albert Sarraut, former Prime Minister of France, Mr. Kenkichi Yoshizawa, former Foreign Minister of Japan; Mr. A. V. Alexander, former First Lord of the Admiralty of Great Britain; Dr. V. E. Motylov, professor in the Institute of National Economy of the Russian Soviet; and M. Etienne Dennery, professor in the School of Political Sciences of Paris.

Britain and France Briefly, they stated their respective national points of view approximately as. follows: — Great Britain. —Something must be done to adjust trade relations in the Far East, now thrown out of balance by the intensive export expansion of Japan and some form of collective agreement is the best way to accomplish this. Whatever agreement is made should have the participation of the United States. If Japifn forces a naval race, Great Britain may have to raise her ratio of naval strength to a 2 to 1 basis in place of the present 5 to 3 status. France. —Collective security should be arranged toi avoid war in the Pacific, but should bo accomplished within the framework of the League of Nations and the Kellogg-Briand Nine-Power Treaty,' the latter to be given greater force by addition of sanctions. The United States, by non-entry into the League and failure to support sanctions in connection with the Nine-Power Treaty, is an obstacle to attainment of collective security in the Pacific. Both an economic and a disarmament conference of world powers should be held as soon as possible. Japanese Viewpoint Japan.—A collective security pact would be acceptable if based upon full recognition of the open door in China and naval equality. Bi-lateral agreements would be preferred to multilateral arrangements, although under certain conditions the machinery of the League of Nations would be acceptable. The Kellogg Pact must he modified to meet changed conditions.

Russia. —The Soviet Union strongly favours peaceful adjustments in the Pacific, but insists that any agreements arrived at must be based upon the j fundamental prerequisite that no nation may use its superior power to compel compliance of a weaker nation to terms that will be injurious. This prerequisite is lacking in the Pacific area so long as .Japan dominates China. America's Help Needed Jt must be admitted that some of the delegates were not quito so pessimistic, adds Mr. Thompson. They insisted that peaceful solutions to such world problems are possible by the concerted action of the peacefully inclined nations. Collective security, whereby all nations agree to take immediate and drastic action against any nation breaking,the peace, seems to sum up their opinion. Obviously in the Pacific there can be no such collective security without the United States being a full partner. The Institute has been and is doing valuable work in pointing out the facts of the case to the American public, with which the ultimate decision rests. 1 Writing in the same journal Mr. Paul C. Edwards states:—"impartially one is forced to the conclusion that the results of the conference were twofold. One is that peace, the ultimate desire of all, cannot be achieved without sufficient force to back such desire, and the other is that there is no possible way for any one nation to so isolate itself as to be immune from the horrors of war, "once it gets started. For the United States it moans that in the Pa'cific area the dangers of war are present, and that we must recognise the facts of the situation rather than pretend that everything is too far away to affect us." United States' Attitude Mr. lid wards summarises three national viewpoints as follows: United States.—Subscribers to the principle of collective security for adjustment of Pacific relations, but is inclined to lessen its active participation in affairs of the Far lOast, while nt the same time strengthening its naval power in the Pacific, a policy somewhat confusing to other nations, all of whom desire full participation of this country in whatever agreements may be formulated. China.—Determined to builrl hersell up economically and otherwise to a strength sufficient to enable her to cope with Japan and thus end her policy of non-resistance. Anxious to see collective measure for peace, but no longer depending upon the help of major Powers to solve her internal affairs, except as provided by the league ol Nations. , .. The Netherlands.—Apprehensive ot Japan's expanding trade in the Pacific and willing to enter into regional pacts to control it, (in faqt, already has about completed negotiation ot sucli a pact.) _