WAR IS DISASTER.

Thames Star, Volume LIX, Issue 16656, 28 November 1925, Page 6

WAR IS DISASTER.

MUST BE RULED OUT. ARBITRATION OR ARMAMENT ? “War is the same worl as it was a century ago, but it is no longer the same thing,” writes Viscount Grev of Fallodon m Iks book ‘‘Twenty-five Years, 1892-1916.” ‘‘lt used to imply a contest between armies, it will henceforth be common consent, mean the destruction, bj chemical agencies, or the crowded centres of population; it will mean physical, moral and economical ruin. It is necessary therefore that, by common- consent, war should be avoided. “Can it be avoided, and, if so, what are the means to that end? “The most effective change would be that nations should dislike each other a little less, and like each o htr a little more; but this aspect tales us into regions of moral or re'.gious speculation. Nations cannot hi ip disliking what they do not understand. “Yet it should be possible for mom, after the last war, to find at '• art one common ground on which they should come together in confident uncerstanding; an agreement It,at, m disputes between them, war m :.st be ruled out as a means of settlement that entails ruin; that between nations, as between individuals, the risk involved in settlement by law or arbitration is preferable to the disaster of force.

“ ‘Learn or perish’ is the rule for nations as for individuals; by evident necessity .though the justice of it may seem inscrutable, one nation or one individual cannot be saved by separate virtue. A wise individual cannot escape being involved in misfortunes due to the unwisdom of his countrymen; one nation may learn, but may vet be involved in the misfortunes of a continent that does not learn.

“There will be no secure peace till the Great Nations of the world have a consensus of opinion among them sufficient to inspire confidence that they will stand by each other to avoid, to suppress, or to localise and insulate war. Little concrete advance has yet been made. People in Britain, and even more in the Dominions, are as yet- somewhat shy of defining exactly what obligation or pledge, they have undertaken by sign-,, ing the Covenant of the League of Nations.

“The public mind is much exercised by a desire to restrict armaments, it seems to be understanding that competition in armaments does not lead to security. The next stage is for it to realise that only a sense of security

will prevent growth of armaments. When this stage is reached the public will be unmistakably face to face with the problem of how to produce this essential feeling of security. “To solve this problem will require

I the concentrated effort of all the Great I Nations in concert, and if this is to be forthcoming, it will be necessary for them to understand that the solution of this problem is the supreme need of civilised mankind.”