Evening star., 1936-02-20
RY BRENT DOW ALLINSON.

BY BRENT DOW ALLINSON.
What is the meaning, the goal and
the validity of the new American neu-
trality policy, formulated last sum-
n1er and about to be re-enacted by
initiative of Congress, rather than by
that of the Executive and his advisers
in foreign affairs?
If it repudiates force as applied
against declared "aggressor' under
Article XVI of the League of Nations
Covenant and supports moral suasion.
backed by economic and financial
embargoes against all belligerents vio-
lating the Kellogg pact for the re-
nunciation of war, can it-Without
encouraging aggression-save us from
a European war, or the Asiatic con-
fiict, which most of the armed powers
seem to be actively and criminally
preparing? Can it, perhaps, besides
assuring the honest neutrality and
aloofness of the American Nation and
Government from these atrocities.
succeed in doing what the League of
Nations was designed to do, that is
substitute orderly and peaceful proc
esses of change for the violence of
the prevailing system of war and inter-
national anarchy?
Pact Strengthening Sought.
Recognizing that warfare, whether
declared or not, whether legalized or
outlawed, has become intolerable to
the interdependent, industrialized
nf hn "a y,i1
world, and that the current attempt
of Great Britain, under the aegis of
the League, to humble Italy with eco
nonaic sanctions" has failed and may
degenerate into major armed con-
flict, leaders of American opinion and
congressional action are seeking some
way to implement the Kellogg pact as
an effective instrument for defeating
the war system.
Obviously. application of economic
penalties to an offending state or
states would be potent weapon for
compelling conformity to law and
acceptance of arbitration, if they
could be applied universally and with
loyal collaboration. Obviously, too. in
the present case of Italy. sanctions"
are not being universally or effectively
applied, but there are moral. political
and economic reasons for this. First
Of all. certain nations do not want
and others do not dare apply them
effectively and in this connection the
sincerity and disinterestedness of
Great Britain are questioned. Another
reason is that, concurrently with the
attempt to defeat Italy in its cam
paign of conquest there is no recogni-
tion of any just claims Italy may
have to larger market and high
er standard of living for her popula-
ton and no serious endeavor by
weather. colonial powers to share
with her their territorial and eco
nonic spoils, won by diplomacy and
war.
Sanctions Weakened.
These undeniable facts have vitiated
In large part the moral grandeur of
the Leagues campaign of sanctions"
waged in the name of peace and law
and the world community, and rem
dered it in many quarters. including
the United States, suspect and dan
gerous.
For all these, and other reasons,
leaders of American congressional
opinion who are responsible for de-
veloping new conception of neu-
trality and for formulating the neu-
trality and munitions control act OF
1885, are convinced that America and
other neutral states, desirous of pro-
tecting their neutrality and at the
same time contributing to world peace,
must set their feet, and their legisla-
tion, on different path, if either
peace or their integrity is to be pre-
served.
The new policy has emerged pri-
narily from the discussions and dis
coveries of the Senate's broad investi-
cations Of the munitions industries
and the international traffic that flows
from them. More remotely, it ex-
presses the deep, historic undercur-
rent OF American opinion against in
volvement in the European balance
of-power and its diplomatic intrigue
that has led periodically into war.
But the formulators and protagonists
OF the new neutrality" insist that it
is by no means an isolationist policy,
nor holier-than- thou, head-stuck-
in-the-sand attitude. They suggest
that 1t is a tried and tested, sound
and essentially juridical and states
manlike approach to a fundamental
solution of the age-old international
and political anarchy plan which,
properly supported, and comparatively
adopted, will effectively undermine
and eliminate the laissez-faire war
system, and greatly reduce the prob
ability OF large-scale hostilities and
OF the private profiteering that has
accompanied and abetted them in
the past.
Outgr0wth Of American History.
Let us look at it in perspective,
therefore, as an outgrowth of Amer
lean history and philosophy of his
tory and law, especially of the famous
neutrality proclamation in 1894, and
OF the Kellogg pact for the outlawry
OF war, for President Roosevelt is now
committed to it by the overwhelming
judgment and verdict of Congress.
If not by his own free choice. In his
astonishing address to. Congress Jan
uary last he invited the attention
OF all nations and in particular the
collaboration of the republics of North
and South America, to the imple-
mentation of the new neutrality"
The Congress Of American republics,
which the President has proposed,
will undoubtedly devote major at
tention to consideration and develop
nent of common defense of the
new doctrine of neutrality.
The only real divergence of opinion
among the nations is as to the extent
and character of economic en1bargoes
that are henceforth to be applied
against belligerent violators of the Kel-
logg pact, and the degree of profitable
or legitimate neutral trade that must
be renounced, to avoid conflict. or in