U.S.A. AND WAR

Taranaki Daily News, 28 October 1935, Page 7

U.S.A. AND WAR

SUGGESTIONS BY LEADING MEN. ATTITUDE TO THE LEAGUE. (By Maire M. Arthur). The World Peace Foundation of America recently completed a series of six weekly broadcasts on “How We Can Stay Out of the War.” No attempt was made to espouse any particular point of view. All schools of thought were represented in the series. Sometimes there was sharp disagreement as to the best methods of preventing war and the best procedure for the United States to follow in case war should break out elsewhere. ,

Admiral William Sims, the commander of the United States Fleet during the World War, believed that America could not keep out of war and at the same time enforce the freedom of the seas—the freedom to make profits out of countries in a death _ struggle. He said that if war arose they had therefore to choose between two courses—great profits with grave risk of war or smaller profits and less risk. He thought it would be a difficult job for any President to resist the political pressure for protection in such a trade, but he would not say that it was impossible. Much could be done by preparing in advance a wise foreign policy that would aim at a realistic understanding of the vita} issues, “To this end we as a people must come to understand that peace is priceless; that it is worth any reasonable sacrifice of war profits, and that a decent regard for humanity must be placed ahead of gold,” he said. COULD BE EXAGGERATED. The president of the Foreign Policy Association, Mr. R. L. Buell, thought that though there was danger of a world war this danger could be exaggerated. The so-called German menace could be reduced if the great Powers agreed to do two things—firstly, revise the peace treaties so as to remove their obviously unjust features; secondly, take concerted steps to improve the world economic situation by stabilising money, removing trade barriers and making agreements about raw materials. The U.S.A, should use its influence to bring about these developments, particularly in the field of world economic reconstruction. He was sure that the American people could keep out of war if they were willing to pay the price. Senator Pope of Idaho thought that the only way to enduring peace was. to remove the causes of war by collective eSort. Every civilised community in the world had obtained peace by collective eSort in establishing law and order. The nations of the world could by collective eSort establish a condition of order and progress. He called upon the U.S.A, to associate itself with the work of the League of Nations. Professor Shotwell of Columbia University was of the opinion that there was no other way to secure peace ex-

cept through the League of Nations. The failure of the League should not blind us to the necessity for it. The final question was not what the League had or had not done but what it would have to do in the future, and how it could be put in a position to fulfil its mission. Social justice was the basis of permanent peace. GREATER SECURITY. The former Secretary of War, Mr. Newton Baker, said it was clear that America would be most likely to keep out of war if there was no war for it to get into. For that reason whatever they could do to render war less likely anywhere was a step in the direction of greater security. He was in favour of strengthening and fortifying the agencies which had been set up to keep the world at peace, the chief of these agencies being the League of Nations. The American people are giving widespread expression to their determination not to participate in another war. In view of the diversity of opinion existing as to the best method of furthering this aim the National Peace Conference has drafted a programme for member organisations. The following policies are considered to constitute a unified programme:— Economic Policies: Stabilise currency, lessen tariffs, final settlement of war debts. Raise the standard of living and' solve pressing economic and social problems through the U.SA.’s membership in the 1.L.0. National Defence Policies: Shaped on the basis of the Kellogg—Briand Pact, and in defence of our soil. The army and navy should be limited and organised in accordance with this conception. The military branches of our government should not be allowed to assume the policy-forming function that belongs to the civil departments of the Government. Control of Munitions Industry: Strive for the greatest possible reduction in naval expenditure and seek agreements that will remove present tension in the Pacific.

Freedom of Conscience: Policies tending to abridgement of freedom of conscience, of the Press, of education, of assembly and of speech should be exposed as part and parcel of the militarism from which the world is seeking to escape.

Immigration Policy: Free of racial discrimination.

Neutrality and Non-Intervention: Tire neutrality policy should be revised in order that the risk of entanglement be reduced. Strongly support the policy of the good neighbour and non-interven-tion developed by the present Government toward South America.

The League of Nations: The U.S.A, should join the L.N.U. on terms of the Pope resolution, which provides that the U.S: shall not be obliged to adopt measures which might involve the use of armed force. That the Kellogg-Briand Pact be regarded as the fundamental principal of the Covenant. All peace societies in the U.S.A. are very active using radio and the films to further their propaganda.