WAR IN EUROPE

Taranaki Daily News, 29 May 1933, Page 12

WAR IN EUROPE

OUTLOOK IN GREAT BRITAIN. MR. DOWNIE STEWART’S VIEWS. . • When he was in England on his way back from the Ottawa Conference, Mr. Downie Stewart, late Minister of Finance, was astonished to find that people were seriously discussing, not the possibility of war in Europe, but 'merely when it would break out. This statement was made by the member for Dunedin West in the course of a review on the European situation which he gave at the annual meeting of the Dunedin branch of the League of Nations Union. “These weaknesses in the original League Covenant and in the Pact of Paris,” said Mr. Stewart, “combined with the refusal of the United States to join with Britain to defend France against aggression, constitute the crux of the present difficulty in Europe. France has twice suffered invasion in the last 50 years, and she steadily refuses to disarm unless some great naval Powers like Britain and America will undertake to blockade any Power that breaks the peace. Indeed, a leading American diplomat has said that to disarm France at present would be more likely to'lead to war than if we allowed Germany to arm., On the one hand everyone longs for peace and denounces war on general principles, but an appeal to his patriotism or his national pride or fear of danger still sweeps him off his feet. There is, however, no need for despair. Tire principles on which the League is founded are so abundantly true that they must prevail in the end.” There were, he said, widespread fears of war between Russia and Japan, between Germany and Poland, and so on. In fact, no one could say at this stage whether the League would survive or perish. AU that made a black picture and caused supporters of the League to feel apprehension for its future. It seemed to him, however, there was another side to the picture. America, the speaker added,- had rapidly come to see that she could not remain aloof from the world; each year saw her co-operating more and more freely. For example, she felt compelled to send a delegate to the Disarmament Conference. She was specially represented on the conference with regard to the Sino-Japanese quarrel. Still more significant was the activity she displayed in bringing about the KeUogg Pact for the total renunciation of war, sometimes known as the Paris Pact because Jt was signed at Paris in 1928. That pact had since been signed by 62 States. It was hoped that this pact would remedy one of the most serious defects of the original League Covenant. Under the Pact of Paris, private wars between nations were not tolerated except in ■ pelfdefence or in defence of the covenant. Aggressive wars were treated as international crimes. The Permanent Court of International Justice has accomplished wonders. It has become a living factor for peace recognised by many nations and used by them to settle international disputes. Where specific disputes have occurred which endangered the peace between nations, the league has met with considerable success. The dispute between Finland and Sweden over the Aland Islands in 1921—the dispute between Poland and Lithuania over the town of Vilna in 1920—the dispute about Upper Silesia between Poland and Germany—and several others are well known. Disputes between Greece and Italy, Greece and Bulgaria, were also settled.

“In all its other activities the League has had wonderful success—in helping refugees, in restoring the financial condition of some European States, "in matters of health, in dealing with the opium and white slave traffic.

“Finally,” said Mr. Stewart, “the aims and ideals of the League are so necessary and have become so much an integral factor in the movement towards a better world order that I do not'think your branch of the League of Nations Union need have any reason to . lose faith or hope, but, on the contrary, may go forward with the certain conviction that its goal will in due time be reached, and realised and will restore peace and prosperity to a troubled world.”