DISARMAMENT

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 75, Issue 281, 28 November 1932, Page 8

DISARMAMENT

CLEARING THE WAY ! WORK OF THE CONFERENCE. I HEN DE ESO N ’S OPTIMISM. That disappoint ment with the first phase of the Disarmament Conference is widespread has been made known to me in various ways, writes Mr. Arthui ■ Henderson, president of the Disarmament Conference in the News-Chrou ■ icle. With those who expected much more to be accomplished and doubtless mea- ' sure results either by the strength of : their convictions or by the expectations which had been aroused by ceaseless propaganda, I have the fullest sympathy; but not so with those who • have hurled their criticisms at the Conference and who have prematurely persuaded themselves that all is over and that the work of the various delegations ended in complete failure. Lt must be said that many of those who have adopted this attitude have , tailed, to appreciate the difficulties which are inseparable from all International Conferences of a political i character. During recent weeks, the Press ot the country, in dealing with the Conference at Ottawa, has provided, the public with a most convincing illustration of this point. For have we not been told day by day of the difficulties, and that eventually the Conference had to be extended for a few days m the hope that agreement would be reached? And on ihe day on which the Conference should have closed the public were informed by the Beaverbrook daily that “not only Free Trade, but the future of British Conservatism is at stake at Ottawa. ” This, it should be noted, is said of a Conference consisting only of a very limited number of delegations, speaking the same language and represeuting those families which comprise the British Commonwealth of Nations, and yet only a “fair measure of unity” was reached. More Complex. Il is with no desire to detract from the importance of the work at Ottawa that 1 claim that the problem of the World Conference at Geneva was much more complex. Without any wish unduly to extol the results of our six mouths’ efforts, it is necessary to remind the critics of these things ami to point out that for sixty-four nations, with their varied interests, their widely differing geographical positions, and the marked differences in their land, naval, and air services, to have remained together for so long a period is of itself a cause for encouragement, as it strikingly indicates the strength of their desire to secure important disarmament resultts. Aloreover, thosee who have heavily criticised the Conference for occupying six months for such comparatively —in their view—unimportant results should remember that delay for extended periods became inevitable owing to so many Governments changing during the sittings of the Conference. A new Government did not always mean a change of delegation, but in some cases—especially in the case of France—it meant a new delegation after long delay. Nor did the dark shadow of the ; tragic situation in the Far East, neces-! sitating special meetings of the Coun- 1 cil and the Assembly of the League of Nations, tend to expedite business. Way Prepared. Yet, despite these hindrances, the period was not so barren of practical results as some would have the public believe. No, the position is not s-) discouraging, for we have prepared the way for comprehensive and far-reaeh ing measures of disarmament. But what of the future? First, it io necessary to make it clear that the Conference is definitely committed to action, as it has declared that the time has come when all nations must adopt substantial and. comprehensive mcas ures of disarmament, and, guided by the general principles underlying President Hoover’s declaration, it has also decided that a substantial reduction of i world armaments shall be effected, to be applied by a general convention ] alike to land, naval, and air armaments. Such, then, is, the programme to ; which attention must be given when the Bureau resumes its labours. How the first decisive step to secure a sub ] stantial reduction is to be taken it is < unnecessary for me to speculate. We . have three very definite principles to i guide us:— v ( (1) The Simon resolution on qualita | tive disarmament; ; (2) The comprehensive set of pro ’ posals adumbrated to the General Commission by Mr. Gibson, head of the 5 United States delegation; and ’ (3) The need for an advance on the 1 principle of equality of status between the vanquished and victorious Powers. s These three points, taken together. s give us the major objectives at which j the Conference must aim, and if agreement could be reached, effective mens 1 ures. of disarmament would follow im- c mediately. These would include tb n J abolition of certain aggressive weapons which would render it less necessary for a peaceful nation to spend fabulous ‘ t sums on strengthening its defensive ] machinery. Then the adoption of the -j Hoover proposals would mean a definite g advance on the principle of quantify j five disarmament, as applied to land ) and naval forces, thus bringing the re- t

spective nations nearer to the minimum required for policing and internal order. Equality of Status. With regard tu the third point, “equality of status.” this will provide the Conference with its most crucial and thorny questions, for unless the vanquished nations of the war are expected Io remain perpetually in a posi tion of inferiority, it must be recog nised that, any system of reduction that is agreed upon can only be complete if it is based upon equality of rights and duties. “Do not be discouraged” is mv mes sage to tho friends of peace and dis armament in every country. Much more than appears on the surface has been done, for the way has been prepared by a stream of useful propaganda, that it is now almost universally felt that real disarmament in view of the world’s economic and financial crisis iranseenc-i* every other

question iu the sphere of foreign politics. Indeed, as President. Hoover once declared, the Disarmament Conference *n itself is an Economic Conference, and its success would be the greatest step towards world recovery which it is in the power of the Government to take. The Conference is moved by a spirit of determination that results shall be secured, and if only the public opinion of the respective countries will con tinue to make it clear to the Governments that the peoples are ready for measures of disarmament, however, drastic, and ready because the peoples believe that disarmament is an essential condition to an abiding world peace, results will follow.