HAS GENEVA FAILED?

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXXVII, Issue 19802, 18 May 1934, Page 9

HAS GENEVA FAILED?

CALL FOR MODIFIED CONVENTION CONCERN FOR FATE OF CONFERENCE United Press Association—By Electric Tel egraph Copy rtgfo t (Received May 17. 7.0 p.m.) LONDON, May 17. “The Times” suggests that as the larger disarmament project has failed, a simpler beginning might be made in Europe by a treaty among the Continental nations, and Great Britain not to bombard each other’s territory from the air. The question of the abolition of bombing aeroplanes could momentarily be left in abeyance, but something at least will have been done to tranquilise the exaggerated fears and check the increase in bombing machines, which everywhere is threatened. A short convention might also arrest the competitive building in large aggressive weapons of land warfare. While the establishment of an international supervisory commission to inspect national armaments would be an important step towards creating commonsense responsibility, it should still be possible on humble beginnings lo build a system regulated to reduce armaments. “The Daily Telegraph” also urges a limited convention, if only to deal with such matters as the renunciation of chemical warfare. FUTURE OF CONFERENCE. FRENCH DENIAL OF COLLAPSE OF DISARMAMENT. United Press Association —Bv Electric Telegraph—Copyright (Received May 17, 5.5 p.m.) GENEVA, May 16. M. Barthou and other leaders emphatically denied the rumour that the Disarmament Conference had adjourned sine die. No decision regarding its fate can be taken before the Bureau meets. M. Barthou told journalists that he wanted the convention and still hoped that something could be done. lI’GII HOPES IN BRITAIN. SIR JOHN SIMON’S STATEMENT. United Press Association—By Electric Telegraph—Copyright RUGBY, May 16. Sir John Simon, addressing the Federation of Women’s Institutes in London, described it as very distressing, and serious, that no international agreement on disarmament had yet been reached. He shared the keen disappointment so widely felt, but did not share the view that because two years hud passed without achieving agreement, therefore the whole enterprise was hopeless, and should be abandoned. Remarking that he hoped soon to attend the next meeting of the Conference, Sir John stated: "Speaking on behalf of the Government, I may say we shall do the very best that can be done to bring agreement about. I shall go to Geneva full of confidence, because I am profoundly convinced that the hearts and hopes of the British people are most deeply pledged on this issue. There is no effort too great or no persuasion that could be superfluous for the purpose of bringing about an agreement. If agreement is not reached, the League is going to suffer a severe blow. The British policy stands for the support and mr.i tenance of the League. To substitute for this new world method of international co-operation, old world methods of one country arming itself against another, will not do.” While he believed valuable results would follow if the general level of armaments were reduced, the real difficulty which faced the Conference was not the technical question as to how many arms of a particular kind a particular nation should have. Armaments were only an indication of the disease of fear, and unless something could be done to strike at the roots of this terrible disease, the best technical experts in the world would not be able to produce an agreement for international disarmaments.”