Evening star., 1944-10-12
New League Principles
Called Spme as Ole
Misinformation Given to Pubic
On Differences, Says Write
By David laurence

BY Dapid Laurence
Somebody in one of the informapn
agencies of the Government, In n-
deavoring to show how much better
the proposed international organizatpn
Is than the old League of Nations, As
unfortunately given out some mistnff-
nation.
The official source emphasized TIT
there are four major points Of diff
ence:
1) 1t is claimed that the new orga-
ization would be empowered to del
mot only with acts of aggression e
war as was the League, but would 3
empowered also to act where threats b
or breaches Of the peace are tnvolvec
Whoever gave out that informatia
never read Article IL of the Leage
Covenant, which states: ANY war Z
threat of war whether Immediately al
fecting any of the members of th
League or not, is hereby declared
matter of concern to the whole Leagu
and the League shall take any acton
that may be deemed wise and effecs
tual to safeguard the peace of nation
-. 1t is also declared to be the friendk
right Of each member of the League tt
bring to the attention of the assembly
or of the council any circumstances
whatever affecting international rela-
tions which threatens to disturb inter-
national peace or the good understand
ing between nations upon which peace
depends"
20 1t is claimed that in the new
organization, "the primary responsibility
for enforcement action would be as
signed to the smaller security council y
But in the old League, the assembly
did not have any such power either
and 1t was the only council which had
primary responsibility. 1t Is true that
the new League subtraets and reduces
the powers of the assembly, which Is one
of the weaknesses Of the proposed struc-
ture, because there Is no good reason
why the assembly representing all ma
tions, large and small, should not have
the right to debate and even make any
recommendation to the council since.
Of course, the council Is not bound by
any such recommendation, either in the
old League or the new League.
80 1t Is claimed that the proposed
organization in contrast t, the League,
would be empowered to de,ide whether
regional agencies or arranlements and
their actions In the field of pacific
settlement and enforcement were con-
sistent with the purposes ant principles
Of the organization"
Whoever gave out that irform alton
never read Article 20. which Secifically
states that regional Agreements, obliea-
tions and understandings mus be con-
sistent with the Covenant Of the
League or else be abrogated.
% 1t is contended that the proposed
League places two basic sobligtions on
states not explicitly recognisd under
the League, the obligation 1 make
available forces, facilities and asistance
necessary to the security concil in
maintaining peace, and to holc imme-
diately availsble national air fose con-
tingents for combined internatiaal en-
forcement action"
Whoever gave out that infonation
never read Articles 10 and 17H the
old League Covenant, which aid In
part:
Should any member of the earue
resort to war in disregard of itscove-
nants under Articles II, 13, oriS, 1t
shall ipso facto be deemed to haveom-
mitted an act Of war against an,ther
members Of the League, which hreby
undertake Immediately to subjecut to
the severance of all trade or finacial
relations, the prohibition of all tier
course between their nationals ansthe
nationals OF the covenant-bresing
state. and the prevention of all fian-
| cial, commercial or personal intercarse
! between the nationals of the covemt-
| breaking state and the nationals of.ny
! other state, whether a member Of he
League or not.
TT shall be the duty of the counciin
such case to recommend to the sev.al
| governments concerned what effecye
military, naval or air force the me-
bers Of the League shall severally CO.
tribute to the armed forces to be usd
to protect the covenants of the Leagu''
There is no doubt about the fact tfit
the difference between the old Leage
and the new League Is OF a minor n
ture and that fundamentally the q
League had exactly the same authorS
that the new League Is to have-namei,
to recommend military, naval and &C.
nomic action to the respective sovereia
governments. |
1t is most unfortunate that the publ
should be given the impression this
something new has been develope
when, as. q matter of fact, the instru
ment or charter is just the same il
principle as the one adopted In 1911
by most Of the governments Of the worlt
except the United States.
1t may be that the administration 1
leaning over backwards in order to ap
pease the old anti-League of Nation
elements in the United States by call
ing the document something new ant
different when actually 1t Is essential,
the same.
Reproduction Rishts Reserved,
------------