THE NEW ORDER

Otago Daily Times, Issue 25802, 24 March 1945, Page 6

THE NEW ORDER

On reading Mr Eden’s important outline of British foreign policy made in a speech at Glasgow, with particular reference to the security requirements of the post-war world, we are reminded of a comment made by the Economist last September, in a discussion of the conclusions reached at the Dumbarton Oaks conference. The constitution of the “new Geneva,” said the newspaper, was not, after all, the beginning and end of all prospects of international order.

Any organisation, whatever its rules and by-laws, is only a mechanism for the expression of the nation’s purpose. There was, perhaps, between the wars too much talk of international law, too much study of paper constitutions, leading to excessive reliance on comfortable sophistries and an easy belief that individual and national responsibilities could be evaded. If the less ambitious content of the new plans leads to a renewed realisation of the importance of national policies—that is, to a study of the ways in which, and the purposes for which, nations will use their influence and power—then it will help to keep the peace.

The proposals for the maintenance of international order which were examined and given substance at Dumbarton Oaks are less ambitious than those embodied in the articles of the League of Nations only in the sense that they rely on realism rather than idealism. The League s failures, the weaknesses inherent in its structure by which evasion of responsibility was assisted, have made it abundantly clear that the future of the world depends far less on the decision that might be reached on this or that question of detail than on the capacity of the Great Powers for co-operation. Mr Eden puts the matter another way, and in striking terms when he says that a first essential is to preserve in peace the unity of purpose and action achieved by the leading Powers in war. It is idle to think that you can have security by agreeing to join together to put down aggressors while each Power acts in all other respects independently of the others. If peace is to endure, there must be harmony of policy and constant recognition of the fact that there is a common interest above and beyond, but not in the long view antagonistic to, the policy of each individual Power. We must beware, also, of collective insecurity, .where each Power looks to the other and makes little attempt to do its share. Responsibility and power must be related if international institutions are to survive the test of experience.

There is idealism as well as realism in this admirably stated viewpoint, which Mr Eden has done well to

place on record before the nations assemble to continue at San Francisco the work of Dumbarton Oaks. The “ new experiment in international practice ” of which the Foreign Minister speaks is, in effect, the formation of a new League, in which a first principle will be—as it inevitably must be —recognition of the need for absolute concord prevailing between the Great Powers on basic questions affecting international relations.