The Rangitikei Advocate. TWO EDITIONS DAILY. THURSDAY, MARCH 11, 1920 GUARANTEEING PEACE.

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XLV, Issue 12010, 11 March 1920, Page 4

The Rangitikei Advocate. TWO EDITIONS DAILY. THURSDAY, MARCH 11, 1920 GUARANTEEING PEACE.

IT is only the most sanguine who can possibly believe'that a League of Nations will guarantee perpetual peace. So long as human natare remains as it is there will always be disputes among nations, and the strongest, or those who think they ave, will resort to the primitive method of settlement. . Those who pin their faith to arbitration or the pressure of a League of Nations, can scarcely have noted the significance of the fact that though , the nations have had ' such recent ghastly and terrible experience of war and its effects, all are feverishly preparing for another possible war. The only consideration that delays some at present is the question of whether it is more desirable to perfect air fighting than to strengthen seapov?er, while other nations, such as the Japanese and the American, are greatly increasing their fleets. While it seems impossible to expect that war can be prevented by any arrangement among the nations, there is one thing that might be serviceable in preserving peace, or at any rate ensuring the stability of civilisation, and this is a union of the English-speaking nations to police the seas and utilise its strength in combination whenever such might be necessary. In this conniption we observe in the London Daily News an interesting article by Alfred G. Gardner, in which he makes a strong appeal in favour of pooling the British and United States navies and consecrating them to the service of the League of Nations as an instrument for banishing war from the seas. He declares that, if through machinations in Paris, the League of Nations is lost, nothing can pre,vent the United States from becoming the greatest naval power in the world, and that this situaWOn would produce a feeling of anxiety in England which could easily develop into suspicion and perhaps into antagonism. There is only' one v/ay to prevent this menace, according to Mr Gardiner. “That is, ”he asserts “to say now while the sky is clear, while wo still are masters of onr fate, that there shall never be naval competition between the two countries. Nothing is easier than to make it a year hence, and too late to make it five years hence,” Mr Gardiner argues that henceforth the United States either will invest the Monroe doctrine with the sanction of her own sea power or a new instrnment pf sea power must be forged. He contends that the initiative foe the pooling of the navies should come from England because the British sea power is actual while that of the United States is potential. Though at the present time the feeling of many in America is against the British, there is little doubt that hostility will cease soon after the American elections are over, as it has chiefly been aroused by party warfare. We have a firm belief in the destiny of the Anglo-Saxon race, and Mr Gardiner’s suggestion of the con aecration of the sea-power of the two great branches to the service, and for the protection of civilisation, is well worthy of consideration and adoption.