New-York tribune., 1921-12-17

Kong, Gem Of the Orient Earth and
Open Sea-
ably have been no war A course
could have been devised that would
have given satisfaction to Austria and
would have been just to Serbia. So, in
case Of any act of aggression in the
Pacific Ocean committed by power
not named in the treaty as we'll as by
one Of the signatory powers, if the
powers fully and frankly communi-
Gated with ono another in order to ar
rive at an understanding. an incident
which without this provision would
yer certainly lead TO war might be
treated in manner that would avoid
Il serious conflict.
A moments consideration of the
kind of conflict likely to arise III the
Pacific Ocean over insuiar possessions
and domnions gives emphasis to the
foregoing statement. Nothing is more
improbable in those possessions and
dominions than an organized plan of
conquest by some power other than
the four signatories of the treaty the
appearance of some formidable armada
OF any deliberate plan OF invasion.
National Passions
If any act of aggression is commit
ted it is likely to be some real or I'M
aeinary insult to flag, some arrest
or puni ishment of sailors, or some dis
elimination against the rights Of per-
sons that might lead to deeds OF VIC
lencc From such q spark national
passions might be kindled into fame
which would not be extingulshed cx-
cept by a full and frank communica-
tion of the facts to the calm Judgment
OF friendly powers. Article ii OF this
treaty provides for this, and it is, ap-
parently, to meet just such eXigencles
that it is intended.
1t has been alleged that it is i'm
possible for these four powers to meet
otherwise than as armed powers, and
therefore their decision would neces-
sariiy be based on the menace or the
exercise of force, which would render
them arbitrary, if not unjust. 1t has
been further represented that if these
fectiveness. if they were not armed
powers; in brief, if they were totally
disarmed, then such an agreement to
communicate, to meet, to discuss and
to come TO an understanding would be
inoffensive and Objectionable.
1t requires but little reflection to
realize how strained and i'll founded
these representations are.
Arms To Be Left Outside
What ground is there for assuming
that al ned powers cannot meet ana
discuss controversies without the use
of arms They have met and dis
cussed the most delicate questions in
the present conference without the use
or the menace of force, and, having
;ni4 To fcr
from the purposes of this treaty, it
would be a violation of the treaty to
base any decision to which future
conference of the powers under this
treaty might arrive upon armed force.
1t is Il part of the agreement in this
treaty that arms are to be left outside
the council chamber.
AS for the alleged superior moral
status of totally disarlned nations, it
should be evident to every intelligent
citizen how visionary such conception
is. 1t is not only impossible to realize
it as a question OF fact, but it would be
complete abandonment of the defense
of right against wrong. 1t may be
never be rep~diated on the ground that
only the totally disarmed are fit to
make a treaty.
The question has been asked, even
supposing that there is in this treaty
no intention to use armed force are
not the high contracting powers under
moral obligation to resort to it, in
case the particular situation is such
that it is rendered necessary to the ac.
complishment of the purpose of the
treaty. namely, the protection Of the
rights of the contractants ? And. if so,
is this not treaty of alliance?
Unlike League Covenant
II this treaty promised definite act
undoubtedly that act would have to bo
performed, cost what it might. If L.
were q pledge to come to the assistance
Of particulac power in case il were
at war, and 10 conduct the war in COM
mon, as i'll the case of the Anglo-Japa
nese alliance, which it terminates. then
there would be moral obligation TO
fulfill the contract. If it promised to
preserve the territorial integrity and
the political independence of all the
SIR atories. as is the case in Article Z
of the covenant of the League Of Ma
tlons, then clearly it would be an al
ljance.
But there is in this treat.5 no obi.
cation. expressed or implied, that goes
beyond the pledge to endeavor to ar
rive at al understanding Tie convo
cation of the powers in a given emer
gency is simply for the purpose of
arriving at al understanding. If one
or more powers should demand mill
tary action, another might under the
terms OF the treaty Justly decline to