Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

WORLD PEACE

AMERICAN PROPOSALS

THE PRESIDENT’S THREE POINTS

COMMENT ON LEAGUE

(United Press Assn.—Telegraph Copyright.) (Rec. 7 p.m.) Washington, December 28.

Speaking at a dinner here to-r.ight Mr Roosevelt proclaimed the policy of the United States henceforth to be one unalterably opposed to armed intervention in dealing with her neighbours

Mr Roosevelt said the United States did not contemplate becoming a member of the League of Nations. However, he praised the League’s work and said it encouraged an extension of nonaggression pacts and a reduction of armaments, and was a prop in the world peace structure. Mr Woodrow Wilson’s gallant appeal to banish future wars meant little to the imagination and hearts of the large number of so-called statesmen gathered in Paris in 1919. “I saw that with my own eyes and heard it with my own ears,” said Mr Roosevelt. Referring to his work abroad as Assistant Secretary to the Navy during the war and post-war periods, he said that political profit, personal prestige and national aggrandisement attended the birth of the League of Nations and handicapped it from infancy. Outlining his own three points for universal peace, the President said he told every nation in the world something to this effect: (1) Let every nation agree to eliminate over a short period of years and by progressive steps every weapon of offence in its possession and create no additional weapons of offence. This did not guarantee a nation against invasion "unless you implement it with the right to fortify its own borders with permanent and not mobile defences. and also with the right to assure itself through international inspection that its neighbours are not increasing nor maintaining offensive weapons of war.”

(2) A simple declaration that no nation permit any of its armed forces to cross its own borders into the territory of another nation. Such an act would be regarded by humanity as an act of aggression and, therefore, would call for condemnation by humanity. (3) It was clear that no such general agreement for the elimination of aggression and weapons of offensive warfare would be of any value unless every nation without exception entered into an agreement by a solemn obligation. If such an agreement were signed by the great majority of the nations on. the definite condition that it would go into effect only when signed by all the nations, it would be comparatively easy to determine which nations vzere willing to go on record as belonging to the small minority which still believed in the use of the sword for invasion or attack upon their neighbours.

DISARMAMENT PROBLEM

NEW FRENCH PLAN LIKELY.

(United Press Assn. —Telegraph Copyright.) (Rec. 10.15 p.m.) London, December 29. Following the rejection of Herr Hitler's proposals, France contemplates presenting a new disarmament plan next month, says the diplomatic correspondent of the Morning Post. Tire feature of the scheme would be the parking of ‘offensive arms on neutral ground with a view to their eventual destruction. If at the end of ten years control of armaments was effectively established, defensive weapons would be gradually reduced so that complete qualitative equality would be realized in eight years. No rearmament of Germany would be permitted apart from the transformation of the Reichswehr from a professional force into a short service conscript army. The scheme proposes a reduction of military aircraft, the creation of an international air force and the internationalization of civil aviation. It is understood that in the event of Herr .Hitler refusing to accept the plan as a basis for discussion, France will lodge a formal complaint against Germany for violation of the Treaty of Versailles and produce the famous dossier.

According to “Pertinax,” in an article in the Echo de Paris, France has already offered to scrap part of her force of bombing aeroplanes as a guarantee of sincerity and suggested the FrancoBritish proposals drawn by M. Paul Boncour and Sir John Simon as a basis for Franco-German negotiations. SIR JOHN SIMON PROBABLE VISIT TO ROME. (British Official Wireless). Rugby, December 28. Signor Mussolini has invited Sir John Simon, who is spending a holiday at Capri, to visit Rome on January 4 for a discussion on the outstanding problems regarding the European situation.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ST19331230.2.33

Bibliographic details

Southland Times, Issue 22210, 30 December 1933, Page 5

Word Count
703

WORLD PEACE Southland Times, Issue 22210, 30 December 1933, Page 5

WORLD PEACE Southland Times, Issue 22210, 30 December 1933, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert