LEAGUE OF NATIONS IN HESITATION

New Zealand Times, Volume LII, Issue 12250, 23 September 1925, Page 6

LEAGUE OF NATIONS IN HESITATION

Hesitation is the destroyer of reputations. The Leagueyof Nations has, in point of fact, small resources besides reputation. And in the important matter of the Mosul boundary the League has postponed decision—in other words, has hesitated. On this the judgment of the “Times” is a swift and sharp pronouncement. It is a variant of “Lost is he who hesitates.” In the beginning, after the war, Mr Buchan wrote truly: “It was right that the Leaguh of Nations should be set up in the forefront of the programme of the new Peace Conference, for on its establishment depended the settlement of every problem with which they were confronted.” It was the expression of a great hope and the definition of a great policy. •The policy did not materialise as expected, but the hope remained, and, in spite of most difficult complications, has in part—not a very large part—been justified; This partial success was due to the moral, courage which proceeded on moral grounds, with side reference to forcible sanctions admittedly not applicable by reason of the failure to obtain 5 a complete concourse of the nations at Geneva. The progress of the League of Nations was, under the circumstances, slow. It was,, however, steady. This, because it faced bravely every problem that pressed fo.r settlement. The hesitation in the Mosul case is a break in the five years’ line of courage, and, therefore, deplorable. That is the substance of the “Times” judgment aforesaid. The position is serious. . It may be said that the League missed a great opportunity of at once inquiring into the facts, and giving an authoritative, competent announcement of them—a thing that makes hard the ways of all transgressors. But against this there is the uncertainty of acceptance of such verdict by both parties to the controversy. Britain was ready; but, according to our cable messages, the Turk refused to abide by any decision of the League. : If that is really so, the only possible conclusion is .that the League has encountered a situation in which hesitation —by postponement—is the only possible course. But that is a course which neither saves face nor solves problems. The only alternative is noted by the “Timfes”: Britain, the mandatory for Iraq, of which the boundary is in dispute, is faced with the need of doing something to show the world that she has the courage to do her duty as mandatory guardian of the boundaries of the mandatory State. In other words, the appeal to the League having failed, Britain must make good by the sword. If that means merely calling the Turkish “bluff,” all will soon be well. If it_means war, God help the world! This. realisation of the situation may, possibly, produce a desire to abide by the League’s judgment of the facts, which in that case would, of. course, be given gladly and quickly, to the rehabilitation of the League’s reputation lost by hesitancy. What is certain is that a crisis has arisen, and the outcome of that crisis .will be watched for with the deepest interest by the world.