Cylchgronau Cymru

THE announcement of the French Pro- posals for an International Force is the most significant event since the signing of the Armistice. It is an act of great moral courage. That a responsible government backed by the public opinion of its people should intro- duce such a project is a momentous occurrence full of possibilities for the future. No doubt the proposals will be received with jeers and laughter, sneers and contempt, by the Chauvinists and nationalists in every country. It will be derided as visionary and Utopian. To these outbursts M. Tardieu may reply in the words of Rousseau, All that I do assume in them is understanding enough to see their own interest and courage enough to act for their own happiness. If in spite of all this the project remains unrealized, that is not because it is Utopian it is because men are crazy and because to be sane in a world of madmen is in itself a kind of madness." How long it will take to bring the Great Powers into a state of sanity is quite another matter. It is clear, however, that if they reject entirely the French proposals as they did thirteen years ago at Versailles, they will have incurred a terrible responsibility for which future generations will hold them accountable. As M. Tardieu has pointed out, the League has come to the parting of the ways. Either it can be developed into a powerful institution for maintaining peace and dispensing justice or it will sink to the level and share the fate of the Quintuple Alliance and the Hague Tribunal. About a century and a half ago the thirteen States of the American Union were faced with much the same problem that confronts the League to-day. They resolved to adopt the basic principles underlying the French proposals, namely, to confer upon the Confederation a larger measure of authority at the expense of the indi- vidual state members. This was the greatest experiment in the realm of federalism the world has ever known. It has with one exception given peace to a continent for a century and a half. There would probably have been no civil war had the Federal Government been equipped with that superiority of force which France now demands for the League. Contrast the experience of the United States with the history of the free and independent republics of South America. Which of these two examples do the states members of the League intend to emulate? Broadly speak- ing, that is really the question which M. Tardieu has pointedly asked the Conference to consider. In their present outline it is perhaps difficult to THE FRENCH PROPOSALS by David Davies form any concise opinion upon the details of the French plan. At this stage the Conference should only be concerned with principles. hot instance, are the states members of the League prepared to agree (a) to submit all disputes to a process of judicial and arbitral settlement and (b) to limit all torce to the amount necessary for the perform- ance of the police function, i.e., protection against aggression and the enforcement of judicial and arbitral decisions? Until these two propositions have been agreed to, the main issues are apt to be obscured in the discussion of any detailed plan. For instance, what is meant by compulsory arbitration in the French mem- orandum ? Does it mean that all disputes are to be submitted for arbitral settlement, even those which have to do not merely with the interpreta- tion but also with the revision of treaties? Article 19, which gives the Assembly power to advise, provides no adequate solution of this difficulty. As the champion of justice, France cannot maintain that treaties imposed by force majeure are never to become the subject of re- vision or that in a constantly changing world treaties should not be adapted to meet the new conditions. Logically minded as are the people of France, they would be the last to suggest the creation of an international sanction to perpetuate injustice or to refuse changes when reforms are overdue. Thus we are brought face to face with the old problem, how is justice to be administered in an imperfect world? The French memorandum does not shed much light on this important point. Perhaps it is included in the proposal for com- pulsory arbitration." Secondly, it would appear that the proposals for an international force are unnecessarily com- plicated. It is not clear why the League should not be entrusted with the direct control of all war planes, fighters as well as bombers. Nor is it apparent to the layman why a distinction should be drawn between two classes of bombing machines. It is obvious that if all the nations in Europe handed over all their bombing machines to the League, it would be unnecessary to retain fighting planes in the national armaments. On the other hand, if one of the big powers, say X, remains outside the scheme as a potential bomber,' it would be possible to arrange the distribution of the international air force in such a manner as to afford adequate and complete pro- tection against the forces of X. It is clear that the arrangement under this part of the scheme depends upon the number of participating powers. If the air forces of A.B.Y. and Z. are amalga-