THE OPTANTS QUESTION
[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] SIR,—It is intended that an agreement between the Powers for the reduction and limitation of naval armaments shall be the precursor of further agreements for the reduction of all armaments to a minimum and for the substitution of inter- national arbitration for warfare as the means of settling inter-State disputes. Apart from agreement by negotiation the only alternative to war for the adjustment of differences between nations is arbitration. For arbitration effectively to take the place of war there are two essentials. First, the qualification and impartiality of the members of the arbitral tribunal must be beyond question, and secondly, it must be recognized that under all circumstances treaty obligations to refer disputes for settlement to the arbitral courts must be regarded as binding. Once it is conceded that a powerful State may, because it finds it convenient to do so, repudiate, at its own option, a solemn and definite treaty obligation to refer to and be bound by the decision of an arbitral court in the matter of a dispute between it and a weaker State, the whole system of arbitration as a substitute for war becomes a farce and a sham.
It is because this is beyond dispute that it is essential that a speedy solution of the dispute between Rumania and Hungary on the latter's optants question should be arrived at. The acquiescence of the Council of the League of Nations in Rurhania's deliberate repudiation of its definite treaty obliga- tion to submit that dispute to the decision of the Mixed Arbitral Tribunal set up by the Treaty for the purpose has undeniably not only created very considerable distrust among nations as to the efficacy of the system of arbitration as a means of settling inter-State disputes, but has raised grave suspicions as to the sincerity of the great Powers. The fact that the attitude of the League Council has, to some extent, been influenced by " political considerations " only makes the matter worse. Under the Treaty of Peace Hungary is given the right to have the dispute judicially decided, and up to now the League Council had declined to allow her to exercise that right. It is certain that if the same impossible situation existed between two nations both of whom were able to go to war, armed hostilities would be inevitable. What confidence can Powers have in each other when in a concrete case they decline or neglect to act upon the principles that they solemnly profess ? It is naturally obnoxious for me to have to criticize adversely the conduct of an international body such as the Leagrie
Council in the deliberations and decisions of which my own country takes a most conspicuous part. Session after session, however, the Council has deferred taking definite steps in the
matter. Time after time, instead of doing its duty and per: forming the " automatic act which would enable the Mixed Arbitral Tribunal to renew its functions, the Council of the
League has contented itself with urging the disputants to endeavour to arrive at some amicable arrangement. Hungary has done its best to come to a friendly agreement, but a reasonable settlement has been prevented by, the impossible attitude which Rumania has adopted. As late as September last the League Council again recommended the parties to make a further attempt to conduct negotiations under the personal guidance of the British Foreign Secretary. Although Hungary assented, the carrying out of the suggestion has been frustrated by Rumania's action at the East European Repara- tions Conference, and for the moment there the matter remains.
The greatest British jurists who have had substantial experience in the administration of justice are unanimous with regard to Hungary's rights in this matter. The attempts which Hungary has made, at the suggestions of the League Council, to settle the matter otherwise than by arbitration in no way deprive her of that right. The time has arrived when the League Council must definitely act. Unless it does do all in its power to secure that the arbitration provisions of the peace treaty are carried out, how can it be expected that the nations of the world will consent to make radical reductions in their armaments in reliance upon treaty obligations for arbitration being enforced ? If the League Council has any, real doubt as to what its duty under the treaty is, it should submit the question to the Permanent Court of International Justice at The Hague for an advisory opinion. Hungary has more than once suggested that this should be done. The fact that Rumania objects is significant.—I am, Sir, &c., House of Commons.
ROBERT GOWER.
Previous page
