ARMED OUTPOSTS

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LX, Issue 18205, 28 September 1933, Page 3

ARMED OUTPOSTS

JAPAN’S NEW POLICY MANDATED TERRITORY TOKIO. Sept. A Tito Sciyukui programme, tlx: main feature of which is the streng'thcnSng of defence, will be. carried 1 out by rthe new National Government of Japan, which is composed of the Seiyukai and Liberal parties, who hold 90 per vent of the .seats in the Diet.

The policy of the Government, according to the Premier, Baron Naitoj includes the making of the mandated islands the first line of defence, and adequate provision for further defence, on the expiry of the Washington and Loudon treaties.

There was a suggestion, at the time Japan withdrew from the League of Nations, that these mandated islands might be armed, because she would not be bound by the covenant.

When it was suggested that Japan should not retain the mandates after quitting the League, Japan made it clear that she would not forfeit them, but would not fortify them. The Government's avowed intention now to make these islands the first line of defence, is a reversal of the previous declared policy. The question of finance is all-im-portant. She has already spent £2,000,000 on her islands—-mandated and' otherwise —and now the army and navy departments are demanding that the Budget allow for an expenditure of £130,000,000, which is the total estimated revenue for flic year.

BREACH OF, TREATY AUSTRALIAN COMMENT CANBERRA, Sept. 9. It was officially stated to-day that fortification by Japan of any part of her mandated territory would be a breach of the provisions of the Peace Treaty. It was pointed out here that Japan acquired her title to her mandated territories, as did Australia, not from the League of Nations but from the Allied and Associated Powers. However, this title was subject to a condition afterwards inserted in _ the Peace Treaty prohibiting fortification of these territories.

Mr. Hughes, M.H.R., said that the conditions under which the mandates were granted to Australia and Japan were identical, and provided that the mandated territories should not be fortified.

“A breach of that condition, therefore, would amount, from a strictly legal point of view, to a misuse of power on the part of tho mandatory nation,” Mr. Hughes proceeded. '‘One must, however, look at these things from a practical point of view. It is not easy to see what the League of Nations is going to do about it..

“It creates, however, a position which is surely not without significance for the Australian people. “It is a sad commentary ion. those porfervid protestations about world peace, of which we heard so much a little while ago, that the columns of the press to-day are full of statements of a world feverishly preparing for another world cataclysm. “Wo must, face facts in a world armed to tho teeth. Australia dare not go unarmed. We must prepare to defend ourselves.”