1 FEBRUARY 1935, Page 17

[To the Editor. of THF. SPECTATOR.] _ SM, — The distinction which

Lord Eustace Percy makes,'in his article in your issue of January 18th, between, the merely per- sonal policies of statesmen and the substantial needs of their peoples, is doubtless of the first importance. But his apparent suggestion that any use of the collective " sanctions," or forcible restraints, provided for in - the League Covenant, should be confined to cases of aggression arising out of the 'first of these two elements, seems to be open to the most serious objections. It is contrary, both to the letter of the Covenant (which makes no such distinction) and to-what seems to me the wisdom of its intentions. " International co- operation in the adjustment of real national interests" and restraint of aggression (even when that aggression arises out of--or is claimed to arise out of—substantial national needs) are not, as Lord Percy seems to suggest, alternative policies. They are complementary parts of one policy. It is quite true

that if the collective system is to work with tolerable success, the international league which is to prevent any nation from " jumping its claim " must shoulder the responsibility of

meeting that claim so far as it is reasonable. But unless the nations of the League, acting together, do so prevent the jumping of claims, the promotion of international justice and co-operation—difficult enough in any case—will be rendered impossible.

The collective system, thus understood, seems to me the only kind of " realism " in world politics that is worth talking about. It is that degree of political idealism to which, it must be hoped, we can attain in the present stage of the world's development. Unless we do attain to it, our civilization seems to stand every chance of, sooner or later, blowing itself to pieces and poisoning itself to death with its own ingenious inventions—while in the meantime, it must labour under the cost of competitive national armaments, be divided by sec- tional alliances, and in general endure all the hazards and consequences of a state of international anarchy.

As regards the particular matter to which Lord Eustace refers—that of the Japanese aggression on China—I have not learnt that China has so disregarded " the needs and grie- vances " of Japan as to forfeit in the eyes of the world all claims to collective security and justice under the League Covenant, and relieve the other signatories to that Covenant from their clear obligations.—Yours, &c.,

46 Downs Court Road, Purley. Annum FLOYD.