LEAGUE OF NATIONS

Otago Witness, Issue 3514, 19 July 1921, Page 19

LEAGUE OF NATIONS

HOPES NOT YET REALISED. LONDON, July 12. Mr A. J. Balfour, addressing the Prime Ministers’ Conference on the League of Nations, pointed out some, of the difficulties confronting the establishment of the league. He stated that those who framed the covenant assumed that the Treaty of Versailles would effectively settle matters arising out of the war, leaving the league the relatively simple duty of maintaining the rights clearly established, and preventing national differences developing into national wars. These hopes had not been fulfilled a a yet. The league had now to deal with conditions never contemplated by the framers of the covenant. He hoped that Germany would soon be a. member, but Russia could only come in when she ceased to be what for the moment she is. Continuing, Mr Balfour said chat whether the Soviet endured or perished Russia was likely for some time to come to be a .disturbing influence in Eastern Europe, which will be difficult for the league to guide or control. Another difficulty was due to the fact that the statesmen best qualified by their positions as Prime Ministers or Foreign. Secretaries could not regularly participate in the league conferences. The league’s expenditure would always be easy to attack. Mr Balfour concluded : “The gain to the world in international cooperation is immense, but it cannot be allocated with any definiteness between the co-operating nations; therefore it is easy for a parliamentary critic to ask what advantage his particular nation derives from the expenditure.” Mr A. J. Balfour, addressing the Prime Ministers’ Conference on the League of Nations, pointed out some ox the difficulties which confronted the League. One difficulty was due to the fact that the statesmen best qualified by their positions as Prime Ministers or Foreign Secretaries could not regularly participate in the League conferences. The League's expedition would always be easy to attack. Mr Balfour continued : “The gain to the world in international co-operation is immense, but it cannot be allocated with any definiteness between the co-operating nations ; therefore it is easy for a parliamentary critic to ask what advantage his particular nation derives from the expenditure.” If this natural frame of mind was permitted to dominate policy, the League would perish. Common sacrifice was required if common effort was to be successful. There were many things which the League could do -which diplomacy could scarcely attempt and with greater success. The Treaty of Versailles imposed functions upon the League

which could not be carried out by any single Power, the mandates being a case in point. If the League were dissolved, a now Peace Treaty would be required to be framed. Japan has notified the League of Nations that ii any situation arises where the Anglo-Japanese Alliance terms appear to be inconsistent with the League procedure, the latter will prevail.