The League of Nations
Activity of the Small Nations
As the League of Nations Assembly passes from its first to its second week certain of its more outstanding characteristics become clearly marked. It is, to begin with, a distinctly virile Assembly. The misgivings of those who feared the obliteration of the smaller States under the oppressive prestige of the greater have been largely dissipated. A resolution produced unexpectedly by the Dutch Foreign Minister, calling for renewed consideration of the problems of arbitration, security and disarmament, which form the bases of the Coven- ant, and a lively criticism by M. Hambro, the President of the Norwegian Chamber of Deputies, of the League Council, and in particular of the Great Powers represented thereon, showed that the smaller States were much less lacking in independence than they sometimes seemed.
As usual, the opening week of the Assembly was devoted to a general discussion. The speeches were on a distinctly higher level than in most previous years, more of them being the fruit of constructive thinking on the future of the League, and fewer devoted merely to exposing the virtues of the speaker's native land. Taken as a whole they revealed certain divergent currents in a body which, in spite of that, has maintained its cohesion well. There is, first of all, the distinction between the greater and smaller States (though, as M. Briand observed, there exists no precise gauge to measure the magnitude of a State for such classification). There is the disforiction between States disarmed under the Peace treaties and others for whom the reduction of armaments is still a largely unfulfilled obligation. And, perhaps most important of all, there is the distinction between the States whose delegates are constantly endeavouring to move the League on a little faster, and those whose representatives consistently urge on it patience and deliberation.
The sharpest contrasts occur in this latter class. They were accentuated by Sir Austen Chamberlain's speech last Saturday, which was devoted to explaining to the Assembly in studiously unadorned language what Great Britain would and would not do in regard to the problems of security and arbi- tration. The speech could not be expected to have given the Assembly full satisfaction, for it marked Great Britain out as a dissentient from the general current of thought and purpose running through the League to-day. Nothing has been more clearly manifest during the present Assembly than the unsatisfied, but unabated, anxiety of almost every State on the Continent of Europe for some fuller security than they believe the League to provide at present. That is due to no. lack of faith in the League as such, but to uncertainty as to how far those members whose help would be most needed iii a crisis are likely to interpret their obligations.
That is the reason for the renewed demand for a movement in the same direction as the abandoned Geneva Protocol of 1924. Most States would be satisfied with the Covenant if they were sure that not only the letter but the implications of Articles X. and XVI. (the latter refers to the measures to be taken in common for the defence of a League State made the victim of attack) would be regarded as a solemn obligation. by the greater States of Europe, notably . of course, Great Britain and France. Every time the Assembly meets it becomes more clear that States will not to any material degree disarm until their consciousness of security is much deeper than it is to-day. A resolution moved by Poland, which in its original form would have called on the Assembly to con- denim all war as a means of settling international .disputes,. is only one example of the anxious search for formulas designed to raise up new barriers against war.
Formulas in themselves can never do that effectively, but , a declaration by two or three Great Powers that they are ready ." loyally and effectively" to execute their obligations under Article XVI. of the Covenant would go far to create a new atmosphere in Europe, just as a precisely similar declara- tion at Locarno did as between' Germany and France. So the Continental countries argue. Sir Austen Chamberlain's speech, in its general tenor, dispelled rather than extended the hope of such a declaration by Great Britain, though the Foreign Secretary did in fact announce that, with certain reservations, Great Britain was ready, in common with other Governments, to bear her considerable part in guaranteeing immediate financial assistance to States made the victims of aggression, and he complained with some justice that no other country had so far followed the British lead.
The Assembly has this week turned from platform oratory to the more prosaic but productive tasks of committee work, Its six commissions are passing in review, a conscientious and by no means cursory, every aspect of the League's varied work. The predominant interest centres around Commission III., which, under the chairmanship of Dr. Benes, the Foreign Minister of Czechoslovakia, is almost a miniature Assembly in itself, for there the principal delegates of every State are meeting to consider the whole field of the League's activity under the heads of Arbitration, Disarmament, and Security. The main body of League States desires advance in each of those directions. It looks for more comprehensive and more far-reaching arbitration agreements, and in that connexion considerable satisfaction has been evoked by Dr. Stresemann's announcement that Germany will sign (and doubtless ratify) the Optional Clause of the statutes of the Permanent Court of International Justice. That means that for an initial period of five years, though the engagement will no doubt be continued indefinitely, Germany undertakes to accept the jurisdiction of the Court regarding any dispute of a legal character in which it may be engaged. Such classes of disputes include the vital question of the interpretation of all treaties, including, of course; the Treaty of Versailles. The only reservation, apart from the time limit, is one which practically all signatories of the clause- have made, namely, that the compulsory jurisdiction of the Court is recognized only as between the States who have signed and ratified this particular clause. Belgium, for example; could require Germany to come before the Court. Great Britain could not, since she has not signed, and, if Sir Austen's' speech is any indication, will not sign, the Optional Clause. Poland and Czechoslovakia, who have signed but not yet ratified, have now an obvious interest in putting themselves in the same position as Germany, whose action will consider- ably fortify the authority of the Court.
As regards disarmament, the Assembly is visibly conscious of the effects of the failure of the Naval Conference and the very limited success of the League's Preparatory Commission. The most definite and concrete decision to be taken by Commission III. is whether the Disarmament Commission should meet again in November as arranged. Here again opinion is divided, some delegates insisting that the League must hammer away till results appear, while others argue that another failure would be disastrous.
This week, all things considered, will do more to determine the real value of the Eighth Assembly than the general discussions of last week could. The platform speeches were' able and illuminating. The last two days in particular, which' brought to the tribune successively Dr. Stresemann, M. Brined' and Sir Austen Chamberlain, provide material for pages of commentary in themselves. The German delegate was unexpectedly emphatic, and manifestly sincere, in his eonfes-. sipn of faith in the League. His French colleague struck the same note and without framing concrete proposals gave: the' impression of feeling carefully but resolutely forward, parti- cularly, for example, in the passage in which he refused to dismiss as impracticable the formulation of tests of-aggressiont:'. Sir Austen Chamberlain deliberately checked the aspiraticin'a` of some of the enthusiasts; warning them frankly that there was a point, as regards both arbitration and guarantee5 a security, beyond which the British Empire could not go-. • Altogether the start of the Assembly has been markedly encouraging, and this week's work in the Commissions should! yield a satisfactory harvest when the full Assembly.meets again to receive and approve the Commissions' handiwork.'
Geneva, September Nth.- YOUR GENEVA CORRF-SPONDENT.. 4
Previous page
