The League of Nations

Next Week's Disarmament Discussions

NEXT- Wednesday what looks like the most representative Disarmament Conference that has ever met will assemble at Geneva. But appearances are deceptiye. This is not a Disarmament Conference, and it would be a profound mistake to discuss it as if it were. It is a meeting of the League of Nations Preparatory Commission for the Dis- armament Conference—a very different matter. The Com- mission has already met three times, and will certainly have to meet again -before the ground is fully cleared for the Conference itself. For the worst mistake of all would be to summon a Conference without adequate preparation. The Three Power meeting which led to Lord Cecil's resignation is warning enough of that.

THE SEVEN GREAT POWERS.

But when once the limitations of next week's session are made clear, its 'importance can be properly appreciated. For the first time all. the Great Powers will be meeting round a table to discuss the possibility of reducing armaments. That, in itself, marks notable progress in the League's endeavours. In the early days all such discussions had to be carried on in the absence of the United States, of Germany, and of Soviet Russia. That meant that while useful decisions could be taken on technical matters, the whole atmosphere was unreal when it was a question of practical limitation of existing armies and navies. Then in 1925 the PreparatorY Commission was set up, and the United States agreed to take part in its deliberations. The following year Germany joined the League and sat at the Disarmament table with all the rights of full membership. Now Soviet Russia, which had accepted the invitation to the Disarmament discussions in principle, but would not carry principle into practice on account of its diplomatic quarrel with Switzerland, has Composed that particidar difference and will duly appear at Geneva in the next few days.

LORD CUSHENDUN'S DEBUT.

The delegates personally will be an interesting collection. Lord Cushendun, standing in Lord Cecil's shoes, will find himself necessarily a little handicapped by unfamiliarity with what the Disarmament Commission has been doing in the peit. On the other- hand, M. Paul Boncour, who represents Frinee, has got the whole thing at his- fingers' ends, and so have men like Dr. Benes of-Czechoslovakia and Count Bernsterff, who sits for Germeny and deYotes his attention to extracting frbin his British and French and Italian colleagues art undertaking to honour the pledge their countries gave when - Germany- was disarmed, specifically in order to make it possible for other countries to do the same. - The United States will be represented by Mr. Hugh Wilson, its Minister at Berne, who has been at Geneva before and was, moreover,' Secretary-General of the abortive Naval Conference. Finally, there are the Russians. What Mr.

Lunaeharsky, who Commissar of Education, --is doing in this galley is not quite clear, but on intellectual grounds it may be to his advantage to acquaint himself with Geneva generally. The chief delegate, M. Litvinoff, will be picking up the threads of international association that were snapped rather sharply after the Genoa Conference in 1922. Mr.

Litvinoff was present at that strange and _confused and unsatisfactory conclave as second in command to Mr. Chicherin, and, as such, bore some of the odium poured out unstintingly in British circles on all the negotiators of the Treaty of Rapallo between Germany and Russia, which constitutes actually the only concrete outcome of the Conference. •

GENOA AND GENEVA.

But there is a certain historic continuity between Genoa in 1922 and Geneva in 1927, for there was taken in the Italian town, by what in some circles is called " an upstanding vote," without signature of any written document, a general pledge of non-aggression for a period of years. .Russia.pledged

herself enthusiastically with the rest, and it historically a fact that since that date she has not aggressed. As for Mr. Litvinoff personally, he is married to a sister of Sir Sidney Low, and led with her a peaceful domestic life at Golders Green till he was ultimately requested to leave this country for this country's good. In spite of being married to a British wife, his sentiments are rather violently anti-British. If anyone chooses to declare post hoc ergo propter hoc, who is there to say him nay ?

NEXT WEEK'S PROSPECTS.

But after all, the important question is, what is likely to come out of next week's meeting ? That is particularly hard to say, for the original prospects niay be considerably changed by the advent of the Russians. It was intended that this should be little more than a formal meeting, the chief business before the Commission being the creation, in accordance with the decision of the last Assembly, of a new committee to sit concurrently with it and work out plans regarding security and arbitration, thns carrying forward discussions on the political side of Disarniament coincidently with discussions on the technical side. But the Soviet Government has clearly not sent its rather formidable dele- gation all the way from MOseow for no more than that. How far that Government has kept itself informed of past discussions at Geneva is. not known, but probably' it will he found that, so far as the study of the written documents can brief them, the Soviet delegates will not hive much to learn.

STANDARDS. OF MEASUREMENT. _

They will know, for example, -just where the Commission left its work at the end of its last meeting in April.: it had by that time prepared a draft Convention laying down the • methods by which armies and navies and air forces can be measured. That may not sound like getting very far. As a matter of fact, it is an absolutely vital preliminary. When we speak of reducing armies, for example, do we mean reducing the number of men, or the period of service (in a conscript country), or the number of guns and the quantity of equipment, or the money allocated to military purposes in the Budget, or all four_? . When 'we want to limit navies, are we to limit the total tonnage of a fleet or total tonnage by classes, or the size of individual ships, or the number of different types of ships, or of all that ? Until agreement is reached on points like these, a Disarmament Conference will be summoned in vain.

THE CONVENTION'S FIRST READING.

The Commission in March and April, therefore, did its best to agree on these standards of measurement,- and it did in fact make not inconsiderable progress. The Convention was only approved on a first reading on the understanding that a second reading would follow in which further modi- fications might be made. In regard to several material points, moreover, unanimity could not:he achieved, and two or three alternative drafts appear in the final version. It is easier, however, to exaggerate these difficulties than to under-estimate them.

RUSSIA'S INTENTIONS.

Was intended to hold a further meeting of the Com- mission for this second reading early in .the coming year, and that intention, no doubt, still stands, though precipitate action by the Russian delegates might seriously affect it. Messages from Moscow seem to indicate that the Russians intend to table a drastic plan of their own. If they do the Commission could clearly not decline to consider it.. There hi, therefore, at this moment an interesting air of uncertainty and expectancy over the whole prbeeedings. Probably the best thing that could happen would be for the Com- mission tq spend a week or so in a general discussion, whether on the basis of a Russian plan or not, and establish reasonably amicable relations with . the Russian delegates with, a view to a more prolonged and serious meeting early next year, at which the preparation of a Disarmament Convention to lay before an International Conference could be carried to ifs final stage. For, as was pointed out by another *liter in last week's Spectator, diffieult though the Russians may be, the prospects are far more hopeful if they are present than if they are absent.