The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1917-02-03

fies negotiation, every one looks to a
peaceful settlement. This is because
it has been tried so often and because
we have grown used to winning and
losing.
\ willingness to arbitrate only
when one is sure of winning is not
the spirit which makes arbitration a
useful means of settling disputes.
That is the trouble with many who
oppose agreements to arbitrate a class
of questions hereafter to arise.
To make arbitration useful, the
state of mind of nations in regard to
arbitration should be that of the
strict and orthodox Puritans that one
must be willing to be damned if he
would be saved. Practice in arbitra-
tions produces this state of mind and
this confidence in the method. The
league enforces this practice, the edu-|
cational effect of which upon nations
in showing the possibility of such
peaceful settlement of disputes will
| be invaluable. The procedure will be-
come as of course and the habit of
such settlements will be formed.
Force of International Police.
But the pacifists ask why use force
at all? Why is not general agree
ment by all the world to arbitrate
! enough? The belligerent nations will
not regard mere promises an adequate
| guaranty. They will insist on adding
as sanction the fear of international
| police. Every domestic community,
however law-abiding it's citizens, pro-
vides a police force to suppress dis
turberS of the peace. Many peop.e
would never create distur Dances. but
! others would do SO, unless they knew
! tnat police representing the full power
! or all for the common good would re-
strain them. I don't see how any
pacifist who believes in police force
in domestic community can object to
tine application of the same principle
| IN a community of nations. Nations
| are not more moral, or peaceable than
the average citizen and the necessity
for restraint of them to avoid war GER
| tainly is not less. The existence of a
| police force and the power to call out
the militia and to invoke the aid of
the army of the United States general
| ~ secure public order without their
actual mobilization or use. tThey
! also serve who only stand and watt
| So the potential existence of a po-
! lice force of such overwhelming ma
| ture the united armies and navies
of the world would furnish, and the
threat of destructive isolation by a
withdrawal of all commerce with all
neighbors. would, except in rare cases.
/ accomplish the purpose of this organ
ization of world force without its use.
| A second reason why the agreement
| to contribute to an International po-
| lice force is great improvement over
a mere general treaty to arbitrate all
I w
| where no force is behind a treaty as
a sanction, no one is especially inter-
ested in the performance of the treaty
| except the two nations who have a diff
ference. If one of the two nations
fails or refuses to arbitrate as agreed,
| the other nations, though signatories
| to the treaty, look on and are sorry but
/ they have no responsibility motive
which leads them to exert pressure
upon the recalcitrant nation. In our
| league, however, every member in Or
der to avoid contributing to the police
| is deeply interested to secure peace
| ful compliance with the procedure
| This motive will arouse a world pub
| lie opinion having an ever operating
and selfishly active influence. The
| diplomatic pressure that all those not
IN the quarrel will thus bring on those
who are, will be most effective to pre-
vent hostilities.
Limitations of Armaments.
| The proposals of the league do not
! expressly include a provision for the
reduction and limitation of arma-
ments to all nations, but it is a neces-
| Sary corollary to the league plan: In
maintaining an adequate police force
each nation might reasonably be re-
CURED to be prepared to furnish it's
| normal quota determined in kind and
number by its geogra phica1 position
and its resources according to a
treaty rule. The step from this to a
| reduction and a limitation is short
and logical one because such a result
| will reduce the size of the needed
world police force. Germany who de-
| feated such a limitation in the first
| Hague conference now intimates her
| willingness to acquiesce in it and GER
tainly all the other nations concur.
/ Objection is made that the United
States in joining such a league will
violate the advice and example of
Washington and jefferson as to en-
tangling alliances. Neither had a con-
ception of the plan of a world league
or of the present conditions making it
Il wise and necessary. [ agree that the
league will be a change of policy here
tofore maintained by US, but it will be
a change by enlargement and growth
to meet new eXigencies, and not a de-
parture in principle.
In 1923 we adopted the Monroe
Doctrine involving possibility OF
complications with Europe which
properly gave our statesmen great
concern. jefferson and Madison were
!, in favor of our maintaining an alli-
ance with Great Britain in order to
enforce the Doctrine. Yet jefferson
tangling alliances The fact that
such an alliance was for a high pur-
pose and the common good. in his
mind evidently prevented its being an
.entanglinS' alliance. The Monroe
Doctrine Vas adopted by us in our
! then lack of strength with far greater
risk than we would face in the League.
The Doctrine was proclaimed because
of the danger to the United States
which we feared from proximity of
European intrigue against our indie
pendence and form of government.
Now Europe and the rest of the world
have been brought SO near US not only
by speed of transportation and COM
munication, but by the extension of
our interests to the Pacific, to Asia, to