Evening star., 1946-03-10
UNO Success Requires
End Of Imperialism
Observer Says Subject Peoples
Must Have Place
By Raymond MoIey.

By Raymond Moley.
Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt, speaking at
the last meeting of the UNO in London,
said that the new association Of ma
tions must not fail as did the League
of Nations. With this, of course, the
world will agree. But it is important
in building the new machine to take
note Of why and how the League, so
proudly hailed 81 years ago, met its
sad end. From fresh view of the
mistakes which ended in failure, we may
learn what we must do now.
One of the weaknesses of the League
has been imprinted on the minds OF
this generation by the film, Wilson"
The League was an American idea, and
America did not join. But this was not
the sole or even the decisive reason
for failure.
Another reason was the absence Of
Russia until so many years had passed
that there was no chance for success.
There was no real power behind the
League. Everything was advisory. It
was practically an assemblage of power
less representatives. All the power re-
mained at the home seats of the gov
ernments.
1t was based on the highly idealistic
but impractical idea of complete equality
OF states. Little light opera states like
Danzlg, Luxembourg and Leichtenstein
theoretically were equal to France. This
fiction of equality was furthered by
the addition of pygmy states to the
Council of the League.
Another reason for failure was the
Leagues impotence in protecting min
critics. Persecution which actually en-
gendered war went on in Spain, Ger
many and Poland. And the League had
no power to treat these as causes Of war.
Moreover, the League had no power
to provide places of refuge for prosecuted
people 1t could not create new states
for the homeless and friendless.
X
And the League had no power to pro-
vide for the protection of the individual
against the mighty power of the state.
All these, however are minor reasons
for failure. More important than any
OF them was the fact that the League
was built on a false foundation. The
peace treaty which defined the world
order which the League was supposed
to maintain was bad. 1t set up a series
of buffer states, Gordon sanitaire to
fence in Russia. This was done at
moment when Russia appeared to be
real threat and when Britain and France
were doing what they could to over
throw the Bolshevik government. But
the makers of the treaty overlooked
the threat Of revived Germany. And
when Germany recovered, it began to
eat up the buffer states while France
and Britain, on the other side of Europe,
were poWerless to act. Germany, not
Russia, proved to be the threat to peace.
Most Of these defects in the League
are measurably corrected in the UNO.
The new organization has created a
better balance between the ideal of
equality among states and the reality of
inequality. 1t has vastly more power
to get at the causes of war, which are
nearly always within sovereign states.
The United States and Russia, the
greatest Of nations, are in and not out.
And We may hope that the final treaties
OF peace will demonstrate more realism
than those which followed the other
war.
The UNO, however, faces the final
and most important cause of the
Leagues failure. 1t cannot succeed if
1t endeavors merely to guarantee the
status quo. The unrest which we are
witnessing in so many quarters should,
once more, be a warning that the
worlds peoples cannot be frozen in
permanent patterns. Subject peoples
are in state Of revolt. They will not
return to the old servitudes, and the
great empires cannot return to the
old business of exploitation.
1t is most significant that most of
the present trouble spots of the world
were not within the orbit of war. The
Arabs. the Indian peoples and the
Iranlans were, in general not fighting
in this war. They realized, however,
that they would be considered as part
OF the spoils of war And they seem
determined never again to submit to
their old masters. The UNO cannot
succeed unless these various peoples
are able to find place for themselves
In a world government. Their neces-
sarlly slow evolution toward self-govern-
ment should be guided by some author.
ity more impartial than the nations
which have, up to now, held sovereignty
over them. This is going to require
some considerable sacrifice by Britain,
the Netherlands and other colonial
powers. But the alternative is the
failure of the peace.