The Southland Times. TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1944. Control of Civil Aviation

Southland Times, Issue 25514, 7 November 1944, Page 4

The Southland Times. TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 1944. Control of Civil Aviation

THE International Air Conference now being held in Chicago does not seem likely to produce the unity of outlook which alone can make its deliberations fruitful. It was weakened from the beginning by Russia s refusal to participate. If the nations are to devise a world policy, they must have the co-operation of a people which occupies one-sixth of the earth’s surface. Without that co-operation, the best that can be done is to reach an agreement in principle, and to set up a tentative organization which later can be expanded. But it is clear from the reports received from Chicago that the delegates are expressing points of view too wide apart to permit a genuine compromise. Australia and New Zealand, faithful io the terms of the Canberra agreement, have advocated “a World air authority, equipped with full control of the international air trunk routes”, and full ownership of the aircraft employed on them. These are idealistic proposals, though it must be pointed out that they come from countries relatively weak in air power. The Pacific Dominions have most to gain from a central control, especially while it is certain to remain', for a long time to come, in friendly hands. Britain’s attitude has not so far been reported. It was generally believed, however, that the British plan, although favouring international control, stopped far short of the Aus-tralian-New Zealand proposals. Presumably it visualized a form of international co-operation, which is something very different from, and less dangerous than, the supreme authority favoured in Canberra. The arguments against a world authority which would own and operate the aircraft as an “organ” of the world security organization are similar to those which have already been used against the proposal to establish an international police force. It seems obvious that the Australian-New Zealand scheme ceased to be practicable from the moment that the Dumbarton Oaks Conference retained the principle of national sovereignty. There can be no partial surrender of this principle. If it remains valid in the sphere of world security, it is equally valid in civil aviation, which under modern conditions has become inseparable from defence. Mr Drakeford and Mr Sullivan were therefore speaking for a lost cause. This became fairly clear before the conference settled down to discussion. In his opening message, President Roosevelt declared that the peace settlements “can not be endangered by petty considerations or Weakened by groundless fears.” He went bn to refer, as a matter of course, to the “full recognition of the' sovereignty and juridical equality of all nations,” and implied ■ that humanity must be served within that particular framework. The Regional Idea

The American point of view was finally put forward by Mr Adolf Berle. He emphasized the conviction that there could be no alienation of sovereignty. “Consistent with their sovereignty,” he said, “nations ought to subscribe to those rules of friendly intercourse which shall operate among friendly States in peacetime, so that air navigation shall be encouraged and communication and commerce fostered . . .” The practical effect of this plan would be to confer notable advantages on the United States, which is already equipped for an immediate expansion of air traffic. Theoretically, the concessions are reciprocal. It is not difficult to imagine, however, that if New Zealand and America’ agree to provide each other with “privileges and permissions” the trunk air traffic across the Pacific will be dominantly American. The situation of a small and defenceless country does not leave much room for argument. New Zealand must have air protection in the future, and it must come from the nation which has the major strategic responsibilities in the Pacific. Nevertheless, it is not easy to abandon the idea of controls outside the reach ’of sectional influences. The British Labour Party recently outlined a programme for civil aviation which has a close resemblance to the policy devised at Canberra. It demanded a single concession from all the nations —the waiving of sovereignty in air transport. The authors of the programme seemed to realize, however, that this proposal was impracticable. They suggested as an alternative an interim system of five or more regional air unions, under international supervision, which would cover Europe, the British Commonwealth, the Americas, the Soviet Union and East Asia. There is much to be said for a scheme which would move at least part of the way towards internationalism. But the most that can be expected from the Chicago conference is a provisional council which will give its attention to technical details, with a general movement towards uniformity of methods. This will be merely a stopgap, an attempt to keep the way open for further negotiation. Meanwhile it seems probable that civil aviation in the early postwar years will be organized on a national basis. A cable message from London, printed this morning, speaks of “a powerful co-operative scheme for inter-Empire air services throughout the world.” The plans are said to be taking shape “behind the scenes,” and although the statement comes from an unofficial source it may prove to be correct. There will be general regret in New Zealand at the quickness with which ideals have had to give ground to practical interests in world aviation. If there is no hope for an international system (not necessarily a world authority), the nations must do the best they can* to obtain their share of air transport and communications; and in any development of this kind the British Commonwealth should establish its own regional union. Whether or not there can be a movement towards co-operation between the major countries and groups, instead of a disastrous competition, is a question which could not be answered confidently today.