Evening star., 1933-07-30
RENEWED EFFORT FOR CUT
I'm ARMS IS HELD USELESS
Evidence Points to Continued Deadlock
Despite U. S. Hopes for Results
at Geneva in October.

In the United States, however, there
Is widespread belief that the adoption
of the Stimson doctrine by a Demo-
cratic administration has made a real
contribution to the security Of nations
which-like France-are armed but are
to waive our neutral rights, :. we de-
eide a nation has been Gti1ty of ag-
gression. But such agreement is limited
necessarily to the action of the present
Chief Executive, who can neither bind
Congress nor his successors.
In point Of fact, the French were
never much interested in the Stimson
doctrine except in so far as it might
prove a platform for Britain to &C
cept wider responsibilities in the main
tenance Of European peace. At the
London Naval Conference, three years
ago, there was a moment when Mac
Donald, to save a five-power agree
ment, seemed willing to consent to a
United States would promise to come
to conference in time of crisis and to
waive her neutral rights in case a fact
of aggression was established at such
conference. But Mr. Hoover from
Washington vetoed any such American
commitment.
When Norman H. Davis. In Mr..
Roosevelt's name. proffered at Geneva
last Spring the pledge which Stimson
had not been able to give at London,
its value to the French resided precisely
in its effect upon the British. When
they were told fatty and unequivo-
cally that notwithstanding the inter-
esting modification in American policy,
Britain was resolved to take no fresh
European responsibilities, the Roose-
velt proposal lost all its political value.
The French press and public were
disappointed alike in the restricted ma
ture of the Roosevelt pledge and the abb
Sence OF any British response to that
pledge and the result was soon dis
closed in the persistence of the deadlock
at Geneva and the subsequent adjourn
ment of conference which was mani
festly unable to function. And nothing
has chaged in this basic situation since
the adjournment.
No Means of Coercion.
The fundamental fallacy of a Dis
armament Conference now is identical
with that which underlay the London
Economic Conference. The political,
like the economic. policies of nations
are today irreconcilable. France is no
more willing to abandon her security
policy than Mr.. Roosevelt was ready at
London to abandon his monetary policy.
And there Is, of course, no possible
means of coercing the French as there
was no means of coercing Mr.. Roose-
welt.
If. however. the Conference is re-
sumed and the United States attempts
to impose the Presidents program of
abolishing offensive" weapons, then we
shall see exactly what would have hap
pened at London. if the gold bloc had
attempted to bring pressure upon the
American administration to modify its
anti-stabilization thesis. We shall, in
turn. endeavor to exert the same sort
OF pressure upon France and her allies
in the matter of military establishments
that these nations might have attempted
to exert upon the Roosevelt admins
| tration
But the French are no more likely to
| yield than was Mr.. Roosevelt recently.
And, obviously bad feelings in both coun-
tries, aroused by the London events and
| by the debt issue as well, will further en-
bitter the debate. It is true Franco
Italian relations have improved and
some naval agreement is not impossible,
but no international conference is
needed to produce that, since arrange
ments for it were made at the London
Naval Conference three years ago.
| A1C OoJCStlOll W q IlSW f4IIlGflCdu dQS
venture in Europe does not, of course,
rest upon any hostility to the cause Of
disarmament. On the contrary, it is
because the reSentments and disputes
OF such conference may easily post
pone, not push, reduction in ornaments,
that there is in Europe a great and
| general reluctance to see Geneva recon-
vene. And, quite obviously. we shall
come IN for new denunciation and re-
proach If, as a result Of an American
impulse, another international meet
ing assemblies only to bog down in dead
lock Immediately
reconvening the Arms Conference for
serious work and that would be SUP.
piled by clear evidence of a change in
the basic policies of the nations now
In deadlock. But while Mr. Davis as
Serts and Col. Howe echoes his asser.
tions that there has been such q
dramatic and far-reaching transforma.
ton, there IS nothing in the European
press or public statements of political
leaders to suggest it. On the contrary,
the German and French press is filled
with clear evidence that the deadlock
holds. And the British and Italian
newspapers are at least skeptical, If not
downright pessimistic.
| All In all, what seems impending IS
just one more International conference
condemned in advance to precisely the
same fate as most Of the recent under
takings Of that kind. And the United
States seems destined once more to find
itself presently assailed as responsible
for new disturbance in international
affairs. already confused almost beyond
| further confounding.
| (Copyright, 1933)