DISARMAMENT

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 20005, 23 November 1927, Page 9

DISARMAMENT

THE GENEVA MEETING AMERICA’S ATTITUDE Will Not Be Interested Unless Naval Matters Come Up SIMPLE DECLARATION OF POLICY. (By Telegraph—Per Press Assn.—Copyright.) Received Nov. 22, 7.40 p.m. (A. & N.Z.) NEW YORK, Nov. 21. The New York Times* Washington correspondent says the participation of the United States in the meeting at 'Geneva on November 30 of the Preiparatory Commission on Armament | Limitation will probably be confined to ! formal attendance. ! The American Minister to Switzerland, Mr Wilson, will represent Ameri‘ca, but as the security question will presumably raise no problems of direct concern to the United States, it is not planned to send technical experts, ! ticularly as the discussion of armament limitations is not Scheduled until next Spring. The United States may find it advisable to signify its position by a simple declaration of policy concerning its non-interest in European politics. No word has reached the State Department that Britain is contemplating offering a resolution to the CommisIsion for the appointment of a special

committee to consider naval limitations as intimated in news despatched from Paris, and officials doubt whether such a proposal would be carried at the Geneva meeting, but if. one of the naval 'Powers made an informal proposal for [Britain, Japan and the United States to consider naval limitation informally (during the Commission’s deliberations, the United States might consider such a suggestion. NON-AGGRESSION PACTS THE SOVIET’S AIM SEEKS TO INFUSE ENERGY INTO LEAGUE ACTIVITIES Received Nov. 22, 9.40 p.m. (A.P.A.-Sun) MOSCOW, Nov. 21. M. Litvinoff, in a statement on the Soviet’s purpose in sending a delegation to Geneva, declares: “The Soviet has not hidden its lack of confidence in the capitalist countries* readiness to abolish wars and disarm, despite pacifists and pseudo-pacifists labelling the late world war the last war. The League pretends its main object is to ensure peace, but it did not approach disarmament until 1924, and then deferred the convocation of the conference till 1925, and even now tho date of the conference cannot be fixed. ■Similarly the study of the reduction of war budgets since 1920 has been postponed sine die. The League’s work has resulted solely in meaningless declarations and propositions. j Meanwhile, the Soviet exerted ten |years’ efforts at least to partial disarmament, and the delegation now be,ing sent to Geneva deprives our eneimies of the opportunity of ascribing to the Soviet the failure of the conference, and prevents tjie Soviet’s neighbours justifying their refusal to disarm.

‘‘The Soviet, free from imperialism, pursues a constantly peaceful policy. It nas proposed and now proposes universal pacts of non-aggression, urging full and general disarmament. If this is impossible at one stroke or within a short period, it should at least be attempted gradually. The delegation goes to Geneva with an independent programme and will endeavour to concentrate attention on stable guarantees for peace, opposing any diversion to questions of secondary importance or jfutile resolutions making the conference a tool of this or that group of States.”