Poverty Bay Herald PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING GISBORNE, WEDNES., APRIL 10, 1930. THE PEACE MIND

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LV, Issue 17236, 16 April 1930, Page 4

Poverty Bay Herald PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING GISBORNE, WEDNES., APRIL 10, 1930. THE PEACE MIND

It will scarcely be doubted that om of the results of the Great; War ha been the creation of what may In termed the peace mind in the case o multitudes who hitherto had no vein

strong point of view regarding any issues that affected the world at large. From the psychological viewpoint, it is well known how personal interest is likely to affect one’s general views, and it is something of that kind that has happened in the case of the war’s

aftermath. No event in the history of the world ever impinged so directly or with such force upon so great a number of individuals, or caused such wide-spread suffering in person and estate; hence the ground has been well prepared for the growth of ideas that have peace desires as their motive. No one in his right senses will for one moment say that the universal desire for peace ought not to be encouraged; but at the same time it would be the height of folly to ignore the fact that- merely to follow blindly the wish that has been father to the thought and seek peace by any or

very means without the most carefu

examination of these means, will load to more strife and further wars, and stultify the very ideas that have led to sueli mistaken action. The influence of this peace mind—and we 'may regard Mr. Ramsay MacDonald, in the light of his history, as one of its chief examples—is very easily traced in almost every department of political thought. Take for example the recent discussions that have taken [dace at. the Naval (.'onference and in the House of Commons on the subject of Article Hi of the League of Nations. covenant. The controversial part of that article reads as follows: “Should any member of the League resort to war in disregard of its covenants under Articles 12, 13, or lf>, it shall ipso facto be deemed to have committed an act of war against all other members of the League, which hereby undertake immediately to subject it to the severance of all trade or financial relations, the prohibition of all intercourse between their nationals and the nationals of the covenant-breaking State and the nationals of any other State, whether a member of the League or not." No one will cavil at the splendid idealism that lies behind that clause, but he would be a sanguine prophet who would say that any actual application of the powers hinted at would not; represent a grave danger to the existence of the League itself. Even with all the humanitarian ideas and ideals so clearly set forth on paper, we have not yet left behind us the spirit of nationalism, and to deny that fact is simply to stick one’s head in the sand. The Kellogg Pact, as it is called, is said to have made such an alteration in international law that war has been declared illegal. It can be pointed out, however, that this pact, unlike Article 16 of the covenant referred to, provides no penalty. It may be said to be another example of .the peace mind applied to international relations without; being backed by sufficient sanctions. Again, according to the peace mind, the American nation is a great, powerful and friendly people, war between whom and (treat; Britain is unthinkable. Anything, therefore, by way of an increase of the American navy could never be regarded as constituting anything like a threat against Britain. Much things being unthinkable, they simply must not be (bought about. But the pertinent question may be asked: If Britain was formerly regarded by some of the oilier powers as constituting a menace to tin 1 safety and peace of the \v t orld because of her supreme navy, why should not the Baited States, or any other Power, be so regarded under similar circumstances' Apart from the ideal of parity, nations are like individuals; there can be no such thing as‘absolute equality. One will have some kind of advantage here or there over the others, and in all likeli hood take advantage of that advantage. In so far as the Naval Conference, as witness the statement given the other day by the First Lord of the British Admiralty, has at any rate lessened the total of the tonnage in which the balance of power may be represented, it has performed a good and useful service. But it is a dif-

ferent matter altogether to expect the nations to disregard all naval ratios and rely upon universal goodwill. backed, up by the League of Nations and the permanent. Court of International Justice to preserve the peace of the world. We must take human nature as we find it, and if we are unbiassed observers we shall find it; by no means ready to launch its

laieria! destiny .upon the vague aponrs of universal benevolence, ’ossibly more might have been acomplished by the Naval Conference ad some of (he delegates been eonmt with less. To frame or to at - empt to frame a programme that

makes a bid for disarmament- as such, is to expect too much. The only useful tiling -that anyone can do is to build upon the foundations of the policies til at have been found to be effective in former generations and to improve the machinery for keeping

the peace of the world by carefully graduated degrees. Although in reply to this it may be said that under former methods the horror of the Great War came upon the world, it can still be said that wars have come about by human means, because of human ambitions, desires or lusts, and the human qualities cannot be completely legislated for within the four corners of any pact or treaty. That is not to say that such agreements should not lie sought, by every means in outpower, but merely that the ordinary sanctions must always be preserved to strengthen any treaty that may be made. Some security must be retained by the powers to guard themselves against; attack by any people tempted to take advantage of apparent weakness to work out its own aims and ambitions. We may ail be prepared to believe that right is stronger than might, but in actual, material terms it may not work out at all satisfactorily. To oppose a submarine by a peaceful gesture will lie of any little use to the defender. In any case, it is always the side one happens to be on that is right. Right alone did not help Britain -to victory in the war. The fleets and armies hud something to do with it. And in the event of any other such disturbance—and there can be no guarantee of any sort against; the contingency—if will be seen again .that force must be opposed by force.