Poverty Bay Herald. PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING GISBORNE, TUESDAY, MAR. 14, 1939. THE PATH OF PEACE

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 19886, 14 March 1939, Page 4

Poverty Bay Herald. PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING GISBORNE, TUESDAY, MAR. 14, 1939. THE PATH OF PEACE

In an address to his constituents last week, Sir Samuel Hoare spoke in a vein that was reminiscent of his historic speech before the League of Nations in September, 1935. Although his views may not always be acceptable, Sir Samuel has a remarkable capacity for analysis and his latest interpretation of the trend of world affairs provides a striking contribution at the present time. For some time past the world has been confronted with the amazing paradox of the democratic countries arming for peace, a policy that is not always easy to justify, and Sir Samuel Hoare has shown, not so much the need for this course —which is already well understood —as the possible outcome of it if the energies of the nations are turned in the right direction. In effect, he maps out a cycle in international affairs. The rearming on the part of aggressor nations has been countered by similar action on Ihe part of the non-aggressors until a position of stalemate is reached and the futility of war becomes apparent. This is the situation to-day, and the question is what course will be followed in the future. Of the two alternatives, Sir Samuel rejects the possibility of a prolonged war, which can benefit none, and makes a striking appeal for political confidence, economic reconstruction, and disarmament.

Sir Samuel Hoare refers, not boastingly, but in a matter-of-fact way, to the unity and invulnerability of the democracies. This is the first essential to an ordered world and to any future progress: it provides a basis on which practical plans can be developed. Sir Samuel says that never in our memory has there been so fundamental a unity between ihe three great democracies, and he emphasises the significant fact that there is an equal determination on the part of all three to resist, and resist victoriously, any and every attack on their life and liberty. The point is significant, for it means that the most powerful forces in the world are determined to maintain law and order in precisely the same way as a police force acts in any community. The strength of a police force depends, not upon its numbers, but upon the knowledge that the whole strength of the community lies behind it. So it can be in the wider sphere. If it is known: that the combined force of the democracies is ready and prepared to thwart any attempt to provoke a breach of the peace, then a breach of the peace is rendered less likely; it can at least be said that any would-be criminal is placed in a position where he cannot hope to benefit from his crime.

If it is assumed, then, that the world to-day has reached the stage where war has become unprofitable, and therefore improbable, what is the next step? Obviously, there can be no sense in perpetuating a state of stalemate, for the world cannot stand still. Since war must' be futile, and since nothing can be gained by each side maintaining its war preparations without either gaining real supremacy, common sense dictates that the position should be recognised and that the vast effort that has hitherto been directed towards rearmament should be diverted to economic activities in the interests of the people. Sir Samuel Hoare conjures up visions of the possibilities when he says: "Suppose political confidence could be restored in Europe! Suppose that the people of Europe could free themselves from the nightmare that haunts them and from the expenditure on armaments that beggars them! Could we not then devote the almost incredible inventions and discoveries of our time to the creation of a golden age in which poverty could be reduced to insignificance and the standard of living raised to heights we have never been able to attempt before?" The picture is an attractive one, and, in the face of two thousand years of civilisation, can it be said that it. can never be anything more than a figment of the imagination?

If this programme were adopted for five years, as Sir Samuel Hoare suggests, if the opportunity is taken to build for the good of the people instead of for their destruction, is it conceivable that the people would consent to a reversion of the feverish preparation for war? Surely in that period it would be possible to bestow such benefits as to prove the value of a policy of peace. Instead of demands for a stronger and still stronger police force, it would be realised that order could be maintained with a much reduced force and the way would be paved for effective disarmament and the diversion of still more energy into economic spheres. If rearmament has proved the futility of war it has been justified and has fulfilled its purpose. Nothing can be gained by continuing it and the logical course is to reverse the trend. It is a necessary corollary of the present situation, however, and Sir Samuel Hoare calls attention to it, that the police force of the democracies should not maintain order by its strength alone but through recognition of the justice and fairness of the laws it administers This means that the democracies must not be content merely to stop war, but must also take steps to remove the causes of war—and this means, In turn, in Sir Samuel Hoare's words, that they must "cut through the entanglements that now stifle trade and destroy friendly intercourse."