Evening star., 1928-11-15

jealousy abroad. 1t sufices to remind
the critics that this aid given to Mica
ragua at the request not only of It's
legal President, Gen. Diaz, but also of
his opponents, except the young bandit,
San0ino, Is not intervention" at all
much less imperialism" but is defined
by highest international authorities as
cooperation" (See John Bassett
Moore's Digest of International Law
1t must not be overlooked that the
action of the United States in Mica
ragua was approved by law of Con-
gress before the diplomatic events, and
that the law. passed in 1925, distinctly
authorized and stipulated the protection
Of American interests in that country.
Nor does that policy of the admins
tration differ from the principles eStab-
lished by our earliest leaders even long
before the pronouncement of the Mon
roe Doctrine In 1923, as voted by
President Jefferson.
Defining what is intervention, Op-
penheim, in his standard work In
ternational Law" volume /, page 1897
says:
But 1t must be emphasized that in
tervention proper is always dictatorial
interference, not interference pure and
simple. Therefore must neither be con-
founded with good Offices, nor with
mediation, nor with interceSsion, nor
with cooperation. because none of
these imply dictatorial interference.
Good ofhces Is the name of such
acts OF friendly powers interfering in a
conflict between two other states as
tend to call negotiations into existence
for the peaceable settlement of the con.
flict and mediation is the name for the
direct conduct on the part Of friendly
power of such negotiations Interces-
sion is the name for the interference
consisting in friendly advice given. or
friendly offers made. with regard to the
domestic affairs of another state.
And, lastly, cooperation Is the ap-
pe!latlon of such interference as con-
s1Sts In help and assistance lent by one
state to another at the latter's request
Tor the purpose of suppressing an in
ternal revolution. Thus, for example.
Russia sent troops in 1849, at the re-
quest OF Austria, into Hungary to as
slst Austria In suppressing the Hun
garian revolt"
X X X X
SO the United States co-operated
with President Diaz in safeguarding
peaceful election in Nicaragua, which
election results In victory of Diaz's chief
rebel opponent. Gen. Moncada. That
comes directly under the definition
given by both Moore and Oppenhein,
differentiating between intervention"
(Which must be dictatoriaD and CO.
operation which is not dictatorial, but
friendly assistance given at the request
OF the legal government.
If, however, the legal government
had failed to ask for cooperation. the
United States might have "intervened"
IN tull accord with international law,
- I'D
and the Monroe Doctrine forbidding
European nations from acquiring terri
tory in this hemisphere. on the ground
OF our "primacy" of superior interest
on this side of the world. Or we had
right to intervene" to protect orr
ACQUIRED purchased authority to build
and protect an interoceanic canal
across Nicaragua. the right costing us
$2.000000 and being of vital importance
to our national safety against foreign
menace. We therefore might have eX-
erclsed right to protect our interests
in Nicaragua In view of the purchased
canal license there, identical with SINH
lar treatv rights of intervention In
the Republic of Panama for the protec-
tion of our Panama Canal But such
question Of real intervention in Mica
ragua remains merely academic, for
there has been no intervention: that.
as already defined, requires dlcta-
torial action adverse to the independent
sovereignty of the Nicarasuan govern
ment.
Even Prof Cox, above quoted as criti-
cizing the Coolidge administration as to
our Nicaragua action, says. Hitherto
its course might be termed one of in
reference rather than intervention"
until after President Diaz had given
renewed promise of protecting our rights
to the canal under the Bryan -Chancr-
no treaty. whereuron the United States
sent 5000 men with plenty Of munitions