Aggression or Defense?

Aggression or Defense?

Not in months have statesmen of the Great Powers striven so hard and so confusedly as they strove last week, turning the concert of nations into a jazz symphony of Peace & War, now sweet, now wild.

Disarmament by Publicity. Soft as the first rustle of an overture was the Draft (i. e. proposed) Treaty for the International Control of Armaments wafted to Geneva last week by President Roosevelt and Secretary of State Cordell Hull.

"This text presents very little that is new," frankly observed Walter Hugh R. Wilson, U. S. Minister to Switzerland, as he presented it to the bureau of the World Conference for Reduction and Limitation of Armaments. Basically the U.S. proposes that each state assume responsibility for all manufacture of arms within its borders, proceed to control such manufacture through a uniform system of licenses, and forward full information on all munitions deals to a "Permanent Disarmament Commission" paid for by "a special chapter in the budget of the League of Nations."

Totally without teeth, the proposed treaty provides no mechanism for enforcement, except public opinion acting on the publicity promised in the treaty. It is based partly on the British proposal for a similar Permanent Disarmament Commission which was to have had one tooth: the signatories were to promise to "advise" with one another in case of violation. Last week the Conference bureau promised to discuss the U.S. draft next January and most statesmen bandied compliments with Wafter Wilson. Alone did Benito Mussolini's spokesman Marchese Meli-Lupidi Soranga rap out: "My Government may perhaps one day consider the question of control of armaments manufacture, but not before principles have been laid down in regard to quantitative and qualitative limitation of armaments."

Commented a member of the U. S. Delegation privately, "I am afraid some of our friends think war is now too close to care to discuss disarmament any more."

Budgeting for Battle. Simultaneously in Paris and in Tokyo the statesmen of two Great Powers settled their war budgets last week. Not a single sentence of Japan's budget debate passed her censors. Tongue-waggling in the French Chamber produced an international sensation, touched off screaming eight-column headlines such as RUSSIA OFFERS TROOPS TO FRANCE! Next day two-column heads began "France Denies . . ." but close observers noted that no actual denial was made of what Deputy Leon Archimbaud actually said. As Rapporteur of the Military Budget, M. Archimbaud is one of the five French civilians privileged to know the Army's secrets. His party is the Radical Socialist, largest in the Chamber. Deputies leaped to their feet with spontaneous cheers and War Minister General Maurin smiled grimly as Rapporteur Archimbaud reached the climax of his careful statement: "Reichsfuehrer Adolf Hitler has tried to set against Soviet Russia her natural enemies--Poland and Japan. Realizing that this might endanger the peace of Europe, Russia and France have wished to safeguard their liberty. It is undeniable that an understanding exists between them." Tumult and shouts of Vive la France!

"I do not use the word alliance or military agreement," continued M. Archimbaud.* "I only note that the Russian Army is very strong and perfectly equipped and that it has been offered to us in the event of war with Germany." Huzzahs and roars of Vive la Russe!

"It is alone this union that stabilizes Europe," concluded M. Archimbaud. "The premier air force in Europe is Russia's. The second is France's. Therefore there is no need for alarm at present."

There being no need for alarm, the enthusiastic Chamber then and there passed the French Army budget for 1935, loaded with the colossal charge of 5,689,000,000 francs ($374,000,000). An additional 800,000,000 francs will be voted later "outside the budget" (to avoid unbalancing it) and raised by a special loan. After stirring appeals from Air Minister Victor Denain, the Chamber prepared to toss him $230,000,000 and it was estimated that the total 1935 French Defense Budget will exceed $800,000,000.

Meanwhile in Tokyo the Japanese Cabinet, after 14 hours of angry debate ending at 3:30 a. m., adopted a grand total 1935 Defense Budget of 1,020,000,000 yen ($295,800,000)--largest in the history of the Empire.

Despite air-tight censorship Japan's Cabinet was known to have split on the issue of economy v. militarism, with Finance Minister Fujii battling to the last ditch for a balanced budget. The last ditch in Japan is the point at which the Army and Navy, responsible solely to the Divine Emperor, threaten to withdraw their ministers, without which no Japanese Cabinet can exist. In the bitter dawn. War Minister General Senjuro Hayashi and Navy Minister Admiral Mineo Osumi hurled this final threat and Finance Minister Fujii crumpled, accepting their demands which means saddling Japan with a 750,000,000 yen deficit. Three days later Mr. Fujii abruptly resigned "suffering from a nervous and physical breakdown," according to his doctors, who said they were injecting him with camphor oil. Grimly the fighting services prepared to jam their budget through the Diet anyhow, circulated dire threats of what will happen to deputies who oppose them.

5-4-4. Except that no delegation went home, the London Naval Parley (TIME, Oct. 22) seemed last week to have reached the crack-up stage. The British Government, after flirting for weeks with all kinds of Japanese proposals, appeared at last to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with U. S. Ambassador Norman Hezekiah Davis in his flat rejection of Japan's demand that the 5-5-3 naval ratio be scrapped to give Japan equality.

Early in the week Japanese correspondents in London embarrassed Japanese Ambassador Tsuneo Matsudaira by cabling to Tokyo that there was some hope for a 5-4-4 ratio. Japan, while demanding naval equality with the U. S., would apparently concede superiority to Britain, an arrangement sure to cause bad blood to boil between Washington and London. In Tokyo the instant result was to set Black Dragon patriots to work on plots to slay Japan's London Delegation, on the theory that in conceding even tentative superiority to Britain they had betrayed Japan. Jittery with alarm, Ambassador Matsudaira in London denied that he had ever dreamed of a 5-4-4 ratio and served notice that Japan will scrap all ratios by denouncing the Washington Naval Treaty, probably on Dec. 10, after which two years will have to elapse before the denunciation takes effect.

To rescue whatever he could out of the parley wreck at London, Japan's Matsudaira rushed around to French Ambassador Charles Corbin and sought to curry favor by promising that Tokyo would support a French demand for naval parity should Paris ever make it. Meanwhile the U. S. and Britain publicly embraced each other in a series of fervent hands-across-the-sea declarations by Secretary Cordell Hull, Prime Minister James Ramsay MacDonald, U. S. Ambassador Robert W. Bingham and Lord President of the Council Stanley Baldwin who ringingly declared at Glasgow: "As far as this country is concerned, so long as I have a responsible position in His Majesty's Government, never will I sanction the British Navy's being used in any war anywhere until I know what the United States of America is going to do!"

Spoiled Japan-- This was Japan's cue to stick out her tongue at the World, and in Philadelphia the job was neatly done by Japanese Ambassador Hiroshi Saito, the virile young tippler who announced: "My chief purpose in coming here is to drink whiskey with good Americans" (TIME, Feb. 19).

Cold-sober in Philadelphia, His Excellency ably lashed the Great Powers thus: "There is a tendency to look down upon Japan as un enfant gate [spoiled child] who may run amuck at any moment. The argument too often falls upon Japanese ears in this manner: If we have the ratio of 10, we will always behave, but if you [Japan] have more than 6 or 7 it is highly probable that you will go astray.' Does not that sound too much like asserting moral superiority? It is something which Japanese susceptibility cannot tolerate. It is something to which no man with a sense of honor will remain reconciled!"

Recalling that the U. S. consistently maintains its need for large war boats of long-range striking power, Ambassador Saito rapped: "Such need may well be justified when war in distant waters is envisaged; but not when only security in home waters is contemplated. [Such ships] may be indispensable for aggression, but not for defense!"

Having thus branded the U. S. a potential aggressor, Ambassador Saito polished off his oration by reminding Philadelphia that Japan is perfectly willing to scrap the greater part of her Navy if only the U. S. and Britain will scrap more and bring themselves down to naval equality with the Son-of-Heaven's realm.

"Murder Farm." In Geneva a session of the Assembly of the League of Nations especially convened to end the everlasting war between Bolivia and Paraguay over the Gran Chaco achieved nothing more last week than an international radio hookup over which League statesmen mouthed fervent peace appeals.

Meanwhile, Yugoslavia filed charges with the League that Hungary was responsible for the assassination of King Alexander on French soil. The Yugoslav assassin was alleged to have been instructed in the use of weapons at a "murder farm" for Yugoslav terrorists in Hungary. Insulted to the last degree, Hungarian League Delegate Dr. Tibor Eckhardt challenged Yugoslav Foreign Minister Bogoljub Jeftitch to debate the issue on the spot. Hungary was backed up by Italy, II Duce proposing a general all-European investigation of refugee terrorists, such as the antiFascists who plot in Paris to assassinate him. Before this challenge to get down to cases and face issues, the League officials quiveringly intimated Yugoslavia's charges are "politically certain" to come before next week's extraordinary Council meeting.

By way of comic relief Austria, minute and disarmed by the Treaty of St. Germain, spunkily asked at Geneva last week for "arms equality."

*The French Foreign Office's subsequent disclaimer was worded thus: "All reports concerning a Franco-Soviet military alliance are without foundation."

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.