Communication

A Letter From Geneva

[To the Editor of THE SPECTATOR.] SIR,—One fact has emerged from the general debate in the Assembly on Monday. The prestige of the League has advanced and that of Signor Mussolini has declined. The authority of Geneva, for the time being at any rate, has been re-established. For that the speech of Sir Samuel Hoare is very largely responsible. The delegates have not yet recovered their surprise at its. strength. They had imagined that with the appointment of Hoare as Foreign Secretary " the Right "' had triumphed in Foreign Affairs so far as Great Britain was concerned. They thought that he had been sent out to control Mr. Anthony Eden. They are of opinion now that they have listened to a speech more " Left " in tendency than any which has come from a British statesman in recent years. It has certainly revolutionised the situation so far as the Abyssinian position is concerned. M. Laval found it impossible to halt any further between two opinions. There are some who Would have liked his support of the Covenant to have been more definite. They point to the last sentences of his speech, in which he affirmed that—" our obligations are inscribed in the Covenant. France will not evade them "—and. complain that the pronouncement would have been more effective if it had been made in positive rather than negative terms. But as a declaration on the existing Italo-Abyssinian imbroglio itthat has yet been

goes further than anything

said by the French Government. It is a statement out of which even M. Laval, prince of political strategists, will be unable to wriggle. I understand that the whole speech was strengthened at the last moment at the instigation of M. Herriot, according to a Geneva story which I have particular reason to believe, The night before the .speech was made Laval and Herriot quarrelled . so violently about its wording that Herriot went to bed at 7 p.m. But Herriot had his way and the speech was altered the next morning in the manner that he desired. The lead given by Great Britain and France has been followed one and all by the smaller States. Cynics have observed that the less able a country has been to imple- ment sanctions the more strongly have their representatives supported their invocation. This is not really a fair observa-• tion, for had the speeches of Hoare and Laval been less uncompromising on the obligations of the Covenant the. weaker Powers would undoubted have 1Y been severely tempted to forsake the League and make peace while there was Yet time with Rome or Berlin. There is one sentence in Sir Samuel Hoare's pronouncement which in particular is likely to be very freely quoted in the future. It was that in which he said that " the League stands and my country stands with it for the collective maintenance of the Covenant in its entirety and particularly for steady and collective resistance to all .acts of unprovoked aggression." The Chinese delegate, who followed with commendable restraint, did not enquire why this principle of universality had not been operated in the case of Manchukuo—when it was the victim of " unprovoked aggression!" But it was significant to see that the delegate of Lithuania, when he Caine to speak, Was quick to apply the moral to his own country, Sir Samuel Ware has certainly 'made a pronouncement which will strengthen as no utterance has done during the reign of this Government the pillars of collective security. It is .a pity that • the support for the British Foreign Secretary from the Empire, apart from speeches from Canada and New Zealand, has been so relatively feeble. Mr. Bruce, beyond- a reference to the vital necessity of collective action', did not discuss the immediate problem and delivered a discourse on nutrition ; Mr. to Water from South Africa vitiated much that he had to say of value on the subject by his odd description of Great Britain as " the country With which we are closely associated " ; the Aga Khan was ineffective and Mr. De Valera M the course of a really

•

eloquent denunciation of war could not resist the usual frontal attack on Great Britain, It was clearly a time when an expression of the solidarity of the British Empire would have been of , immense help and it has-never been really adequately made manifest. I am ,ePnvineed, 1Wwever,, from hay talks with Empire delegates that it does in. fact exist!, There has been no wavering in the united determination of

the Assembly to operate the Covenant. It has been demon- strated in the most impressive manner possible that Italy has not a friend among the League Powers.

What will be her next move ? So far the Italian delegation has listened in silence. Their relations with other delega- tions have been correct, and on the whole good humoured. After Sir Samuel Hoare's speech Baron Aloisi was indeed heard to make the jesting remark that it was a bombe glad. But in the next few days Italy will have to come into the open. The Committee of Five will make its report to the Council who in its turn will present the recommendations to Italy and Abyssinia. I understand that they will in no sense contain directly or indirectly a condemnation of Italy. They will simply be offered as a basis of conciliation. The Italiandelegation will find no excuse in them for a spectacular exit from the League of Nations.

In the last few days there have been rumours that Mussolini had been impressed by the solidarity of opinion at Geneva and was in a more tractable mood. I understand that there is no basis for this belief. Those who are in touch with Rome insist that there is no sign of wavering and that Mussolini is determined on at any rate one battle. In the long run this may be of advantage to the League. It was found in some quarters at one moment that the recommendations of the Committee of It f Five reported t

beyond

h

yon! the Paris proposals. M. m ng

anxious to make alterations that would enable Mussolini to contend that he had obtained further concessions. This device would certainly have suited M. Laval. It would have enabled France to maintain her defensive alliance with Italy and at the same time preserve the League for future use against possible German aggression. The intransigeance of Mussolini has at any rate effectively removed the danger that the machinery of the League might be prostituted to delivering Abyssinia over to Italy under the forms of law. do not believe that it ever seriously existed. The British Government for the first time have detected the trap and have in the TLE4aidgillye, eagftneinr sStirISteallynuetlhHatoaarne;1 speech, has hardened so been determined not to fall into it. • •

Public opinion too settlement that involved the surrender of Abyssinian inde- pendence would be met with such a public outcry that it would never be carried. It still remains true that only a miracle can induce Signor Mussolini to abandon the Abyssinian adventure, but the proceedings at Geneva this week have emphasised beyond a shadow of a peradventure that it will encounter the hostility of all the League Powers and will in fact be met by their massed resistance.

Mussolini at any rate will not be able to complain that he has not been warned. Not since the days when Lord Balfour led public opinionrehsesreivehao‘r.e tthhee deexlpibreersasitoinonsooff the essential unity of purp more deeisive.—I am, Sir, &c., Assembly been more imp

yova GENEVA CORRESPONDENT.