THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES FRIDAY, JUNE 12, 1925. PEACE AND SECURITY.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19504, 12 June 1925, Page 6

THE OTAGO DAILY TIMES FRIDAY, JUNE 12, 1925. PEACE AND SECURITY.

Mb Ramsav MacDonald’s complaint that the Labour Government’s work in pacifying Europe has been largely undone by its successor will not carry conviction is the view of the great majority of his countrymen. The Labour Government's achievements in the interests of peace amounted at the finish to no great deal. The negotiations with Russia furnished the fulcrum for the lever by which Mr Ramsay MacDonald was ousted from office. There was the Geneva Protocol, that much-discussed instrument for peace, with the birth of which Mr Ramsay MacDonald certainly had a good deal to do, and for the speedy interment of which the present Government was mainly responsible. Rut the Protocol simply would not pass the test of practical scrutiny. Apart from the attitude of the Rritish Government itself the dominions were not prepared to accept its provisions and commitments. Had the Labour Government remained in office Mr MacDonald would liave been confronted with a delicate problem in the divergence of the views of his own Government and those of the Governments of the dominions on so far-reaching a question. Had there been a really strong conviction on the part of the Powers represented in the League of Nations that the Protocol would achieve what was hoped from it, a chorus of lamentation might have been expected over its demise. The Powers concerned have taken the event very calmly. Writing in a recent issue of the Fortnightly Review, “Augur” observes ; —“The Protocol is at present useless because premature. It presupposes an international situation in social allairs which exists yet only in the imagination of certain idealists. When a League of Nations will embrace all peoples, and when and if these peoples learn to place the interests ol humanity above their own national ones, thou the Protocol will come so naturally that there will not even be a ripple of discussion when it is imposed. There is a certain educational value in bringing idealist measures to the attention of mankind, but their application must not be subordinated tb the acceptation of definite practical decisions. They must bo given always indefinite time to mature. Mr Ramsay MacDonald killed the Protocol when ho insisted that it must bo subordinated to the definite date and to the practical result of a conference on disarmament.” This is sane reasoning. Mr Ramsay MacDonald would bo hard put to it to leply satisfactorily to points such as those made, for example, by Admiral Sir Reginald Bacon in the following statement: ‘The most unpractical of all the proposals of the League escaped prematurely from the ecstatic atmosphere of Geneva only to meet with a severe frostbite in the saner air of Great Britain. This was a preposterous suggestion for this country to spend some £•50,000,000 annually to provide the League with a navy to use as a ‘bogey’ to enforce its decisions, . . . Although the League can coerce the smaller nations into obedience, and can do useful work in the financial and social reorganisation of the more needy warstriken countries, incursions into the international politics of first-class Powers, backed np by threats of warlike operations, will not lead to peace.” The best work accomplished by Mr Ramsay MacDonald, when at the Foreign Office, was in contributing to the promotion of more harmonious relations between France, Groat Britain, and Germany, though in that connection it was fortunate for his endeavours that M. Poincare was replaced by M, Horriot as head of the French Government. Without these improved relations Mr Chamberlain would not harm found the way very clear for an advance along the lines of present British policy. In making his funeral oration over the Geneva Protocol in March, Mr Chamberlain stated that the Rritish Government had concluded that the best way of dealing with the situation was, with the co-operation of the League, 'to supplement the Covenant by making special arrangements in order to meet special needs. Ho added : —“That these arrangements should he purely defensive in character, that they should bo framed in the spirit of the Covenant, working in close harmony with the League and under its guidance, is manifest. And In the opinion of the British Government these objects can best be attained by knitting together the nations most immediately concerned, and whoso differences might lead to a renewal of strife, by moans of treaties framed with the sole object of maintaining, as between themselves an unbroken peace. Within its limits no quicker remedy for our present ills can easily be found, nor any surer safeguard against future calamities.” There have emerged the proposals for a Western Pact of Security which are now being discussed with Germany. Security—British security—is a straightforward issue upon which the Homo Government is not likely to experience much difficulty in approaching the dominions. Mr Ramsay MacDonald, while yet the Security agreement is hut nebulous, announces that the Labour Party will oppose it because individual pacts and alliances create the organisation for war, and because it represents an attempt to supersede the League of Nations as a treaty-making medium. This is tantamount to an affirmation that Great Britain should lend herself to an endeavour to make the League accomplish more than it is capable of accomplishing, and should decline to subscribe to any effort to supplement the usefulness of the League within the limits of its capacity, however desirable such effort may appear and however excellent the probable results from the viewpoint of peace. Nc Power stands more firmly than Great Britain by the Covenant of the League, and no Power has less desire to see the League superseded. In connection with the present negotiations it must he sufficiently apparent that Great Britain cannot have any complications by pacts of security which she might find it difficult to fulfil at a critical moment. It may be taken for granted that this consideration will have been kept in the foreground in (he agreement with France respecting the terms of tho Note te Berlin-.

A MINISTER WITHOUT FINESSE. Upon Danncvirko, no unimportant place, lias been conferred the honour of welcoming Mr Coates on his first public appearance as ■ Prime Minister. The switchuig-on of jJannevirke’s hydroelectric power might seem to afford a rather curious occasion for the new leader’s initial utterance, but on consideration there is nothing really incongruous in the circumstance. Practical and industrial activity is evidently the objective which Mr Coates has in view. Material details will not be beneath his notice, and he frankly intimates that his forte will bo work, not words. It is necessary, he says, to “take coats off” and to labour in the national interest without regard to class distinctions. If ho adheres to this principle and does not change his coat (which, to be sure, is quite unlikely) it may safely be assumed that the country will not “take Coates off” in a hurry. In plainspeaking colloquial vein he says that his “job” covers all national affairs,- —not merely (with a hint to Dannevirke) hydro-electricity, but the requirements of every man and every woman in the dominion. It has been suggested in prejudiced quarters that the Prime Minister is not a friend of the workers, in the invidiously restricted sense of the term. His administration of the Public Works and Railways departments - has given no warrant for a reflection of this kind. He has endeavoured to do justice to all classes of the community, and the future is not likely to contradict the past. Ho urges, again with a colloquial touch, that it is “necessary to divorce political humbug from the prosecution of the country’s developmental works,” and he lays stress, on the imperative need of maintaining the security of financial credit. Mr Coates, perhaps thinking of some expressed misgivings, admits that he has not been a close political student. “Anyhow,” ho says, “I have not the finesse of politics,” and there may be a half-contemptuous note in iho use of the word “finesse.” Of course, a Prime Minister must possess an adequate knowledge of political tactics, especially as applied to the exigencies of parliamentary management, and in these respects Mr Massey’s successor may have something to learn. But- the majority of the people of New Zealand will not quarrel with him if he disregards finesse, provided that public business is despatched with prompt efficiency. “Don’t expect too much,” said the Prime Minister at Dannevirke ; “I trust that I shall be able to render some service to you and that you will not have to regret the job being placed on my shoulders. It will not be for the want of trying if 1 can no® give a reasonable account/' It is a fair proposition, and we are confident that it will be realised, especially if wise counsels prevail in connection with the current project of party fusion.