AUG 18 1824 INTERNATIONAL CONCILIATION Published monthly by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. A PRACTICAL PLAN FOR DISARMAMENT DRAFT TREATY OF DISARMAMENT AND SECURITY PREPARED BY AN AMERICAN GROUP CARNEGIE ENDOWMENT FOR INTERNATIONAL PEACE DIVISION OF INTERCOURSE AND EDUCATION EDITORIAL OFFICE: 407 WEST 117TH STREET, NEW YORK CITY Subscription price: 25 cents for one year, one dollar for five years FORMER PUBLICATIONS DEALING WITH THE Document No. 161 Disarmament in its Relation to the Naval Policy and the Naval Building Program of the United States by Arthur H. Pollen, April, 1921. No. 164 Convention for the Control of the Trade in Arms and Ammunition, and Protocol, signed at Saint-Germainen-Laye, September 10, 1919. July, 1921. No. 169 Washington Conference on the Limitation of Arma ment. December, 1921. No. 172 Washington Conference on the Limitation of Armament. Part II: Treaties and Resolutions. March, 1922. No. 188 The Reduction of Armaments: Report of the Temporary Mixed Commission to the League of Nations; Report of the Third Committee to the Third Assembly of the League; Memorandum of the Temporary Mixed Commission on the Defense Expenditures of Twentyone Countries; Draft Treaty of Mutual Guarantee; Statement by Nicholas Murray Butler. July, 1923. No. 191 Debate on Disarmament in the House of Commons, July 23, 1923. Syllabus No. XII October, 1923. Limitation of Armament, by Quincy Wright. 39 pages, New York, 1921. (Price 25 cents.) INTRODUCTION I American Opinion and Policy It is more and more apparent that problems of international relations fall into two main categories: those which deal with economics and those which concern national security. Now that a beginning has at last been made toward the clarification and settlement of reparations, it is time to consider whether anything can be done in a similar way towards the settlement of the other outstanding issue. The continuance of armaments by the European governments has been our best excuse for non-participation in European affairs, even in plans for economic recovery, for fear they would involve us still further in a dangerous situation. We have felt and stated-that so long as Europe continues to waste its substance in such perilous and extravagant experiments, it is the duty of America to hold aloof. When, however, one turned to those Americans who have protested most sincerely against European militaristic tendencies and the development of armaments by European governments today and asked for a substitute policy or for measures of reform, national and international, which would eliminate or lessen the evil in Europe, one came upon a most disconcerting situation; for so far there has been little attempt to meet the situation as it actually exists, or to prepare to meet it by a systematic study of its data. For the most part we have had moral protests, earnest and sincere, but lacking in the knowledge of the situation against which the protest is made. Constructive plans carefully drawn with reference to their application are either lacking or cover but a part of the problem. First of all, it cannot be stated too emphatically that the |