The Star. THURSDAY, MAY 2, 1912. THE DARDANELLES.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 10450, 2 May 1912, Page 2

The Star. THURSDAY, MAY 2, 1912. THE DARDANELLES.

f Whatever the outcome of the Turcolialian war may be, it seems certain that the Powers will shortly take into consideration tlio general law regarding the Dardanelles. So far as the passage of warships is concerned, only Russia is likely to demand a change, although a diplomatic deal may secure her tho support of some other Power. The difficulty of dealing with the Dardanelles at all, however, arises from the fact that any attempt to secure the freo passage of ships at all times would interfere with Turkey's sovereign rights. Turkey, of course, owns both; shores of the Dardanelles. The Sea of Marmora and the Bosphorus, and the passage from the Black Sea to the Mediterranean lies wholly through territorial waters. There is,, therefore, no 1 question its to Turkey's right to close the strait to all ships at the present time, but it is obvious that the holding-up of cargoes valued at four million pounds is too serious a matter to be ignored by the Governments of the countries concerned. The position of tho law in regard to warships is interesting, though not, of course, immediately involved. By the Convention of London, signed in 1841 by Turkey, Britain. France, Austria, Prussia ami Russia, foreign warships were excluded from the narrow seas, and tlie agreement was confirmed by the Treaty of Paris in 1856 and by the Convention of London in 1871. Turkey may permit the passage of warships in time of peace, but a few years ago there was a disposition to withdraw even this right. It will be remembered that during the Russo-Japanese war four Russian destroyers were allowed to pass out of tho Black Sea provided they were disarmed and sailed under the mercantile flag, and later two merchant ships, after passing through the Dardanelles, were converted into cruisers and were used to harass foreign vessels on the trade route to <he Far East. Ono of these vessels stopped an Australian liner. Britain entered a protest against tho permission given to these Russian ships, but no other Power was sufficiently interested to interfere. Previously Britain had urged that warships should be allowed to pass and Russia had opposed the provision, but the experience of the Russo-Japan-ese war brought about a change of policy in botli countries. The bearing of this particular discussion oil the present situation is not very obvious, because the vessels now affected are merchantmen and not warships,, but it is arguable that the conventions to which Turkey has assented 1 in the past leave room for the reopening of the question in regard to merchant shipping. Turkey certainly divested herself of some of her sovereign rights when alio signed an agreement limiting her powers where warships were concerned, and if the Powers had the right to impose conditions of any sort to govern the Dardanelles tliey have still the right to propose a variation or extension of those conditions. When Italy invaded Tripoli she sent a fleet into the /Egean Sea, but a hint that operations in that quarter might involve trouble in tho Balkans was sufficient to induce her to withdraw, and she promised to confine the hostilities to Tripoli. She lias not kept that promise, because demonstrations have been made in tho Red Sea, and Beirut was bombarded, but until now there has been no fighting in European waters. Tho ill success that has attended the operations in Tripoli has led to a more serious development from the European point of view, and there is no doubt that the Powers have been in communication with both tho belligerents on tho subject.