Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

Х

moment we have allied ourselves too closely with any nation, the moment we are too weak to be of help, we shall find that the friendship of other nations is for us to seek, and that it does not flow to us spontaneously.

Our supreme interest, therefore, is to treat all nations with equal justice; and that we may do this without fear we must be both free and strong.

OUR BEST COOPERATION As for our cooperation with other nations to achieve and preserve the peace of the world, we can offer it most effectively not by promises but by procedure. We should apply in our foreign relations the principles that have made us great as a nation. These are: (1) The recognition of inherent rights in states as well as in individuals; (2) the establishment of respect for these rights in the form of voluntarily accepted law; (3) the equality of all before the law; (4) a court, accessible to all, on equal terms, where rights may be defended against an aggressor; (5) reliance upon the growth of public opinion for the enforcement of court decisions.

From this statement it would appear that the principal avenue of approach for cooperation with other nations would be along the line of development of world law. This was in a fair condition of progress when, in 1914, it was interrupted, as we have seen, by an effort to solve the problem of world peace through a political combination, supported by a wholly imaginary armed power. We have learned that no nation has felt prepared actually to use its armed forces—the employment of which was contemplated and pledged in the Covenant of the League of Nations except for the defence of its own interests or the interests of those with whom it was united by a particular alliance; and we have seen the conception on which the League of Nations was founded transformed by the proposal that only those nations which are by their situation in space peculiarly subject to the danger of invasion should be expected to give mutual guaranties. This proposal, which is still under discussion, is a complete surrender of the idea that

a

the United States, for example, is responsible for the peace of Europe. It is the distinct assertion of a doctrine of limited responsibility and reciprocal guaranties.

As the United States is not in a position of danger from immediate neighbors and is itself no menace to any of them, its responsibility for world peace would seem to be limited to (1) just conduct in foreign relations; (2) insistence that foreign intervention be excluded from this hemisphere; (3) continuation of the leadership which its past has thrust upon it in further developing world law; and (4) the free expression of American opinion regarding questions of international ethics. If public opinion is to exert any influence, it must be expressed without fear. But only a strong nation will have the courage to express with freedom its moral convictions.

WORLD LAW

a

This last duty may well take the form of an effort to induce the League of Nations to permit the League's Court to be transformed into a World Court and to obtain the continuation of The Hague Conferences with special reference to the perfecting of international law as a system to be applied by the World Court as it is developed, Compulsory jurisdiction might perhaps well be suspended until the rules of law are more clearly defined, but with the understanding that all strictly justiciable questions are to be adjudicated. The world would thus have as much peace as it is prepared for and as the great powers would permit.

"As much peace as the world is prepared for and as the great powers would permit”—for there are many possibilities of war in the treaties of peace and in the policies of the great powers as well as in the animosities of the small ones.

PARTICIPATION IN COUNCIL There is much room therefore for future conciliation. How far the United States should participate in any council dealing with European peace is a serious problem. Undoubtedly this Government should be represented wherever its interests are under discussion, and it would be an act of folly to oppose this through any prejudice against any consultative body, whatever it might be. It would be humiliating to think that the United States could not be represented by a spokesman wherever the interests of this country are to be decided, so long as those interests are real. The discussion of purely European matters, however, involves great dangers. To give advice is to assume responsibility, and to assume responsibility is to create an obligation. After the Conference of Paris, there should be no need of further enlightenment on this subject.

American interests are everywhere where trade and commerce penetrate. Where there are responsible governments these interests can be protected through ordinary diplomatic intercourse, except in cases where international combinations are forming and agreements are being drawn. There not the unofficial, but the official observer should be on hand, but with a carefully limited latitude of action. When it comes to the weaker nations the nations that are not dealt with, but dealt about—there also the United States should always be on the spot in the person of a discreet but responsible representative.

Such are some of the considerations that must be taken into account when it is proposed to form a plan for the cooperation of the United States with other nations to achieve and preserve the peace of the world. No purely subjective scheme will have any value. If a plan is to become practicable, it must be of a nature to receive general support not only by the people and Government of the United States but in other countries also. What should be aimed at is a union of wills for peace. Nor should it be overlooked that no nation is disposed to act against its own interest and that national interests are not only different but often conflicting. Not only so, nations are composite personalities, very unequal in their characteristics and aspirations, as well as in their ideals and their power to realize them. There is only one respect in which sovereign states are equal—that is in the realm of right and

a

law. There magnitude and power are extraneous. The central problem is therefore to extend that realm and to define it. That is the work of conferences; for law in its modern sense is not a rule of action imposed by a superior upon an inferior, but a system of freely accepted rules to which justice requires a pledge of obedience.

One other consideration should not pass without notice. Cooperation is essentially multilateral and reciprocal. It can occur therefore only where there is a general willingness to cooperate and when the conditions are favorable for cooperation. No plan, even if inherently practicable and officially adopted, can become effective until the nations are ready to act upon it. Cooperation, therefore, is not merely a form of procedure by the United States alone; it is of necessity action in association with other nations that are prepared and dis. posed to act in an honorable and effectual manner for the good of all.

[ocr errors]

LIST OF PUBLICATIONS
Nos. 1-185 (April, 1907, to April, 1923). Including papers by Baron d'Es-
tournelles de Constant, George Trumbull Ladd, Elihu Root, James Brown
Scott, Barrett Wendell, Charles E. Jefferson, Seth Low. John Bassett Moore,
William James, Andrew Carnegie, Pope Pius X, Heinrich Lammasch,

Norman
Angell, Charles W. Eliot, Sir Oliver Lodge, Lord Haldane, Alfred H. Fried,
James Bryce, and others; also a series of official documents dealing with the
European War, the League of Nations, the Peace Conference, and with several
of the political and economic problems resulting from the War. A list of titles
and authors will be sent on application.
186. The United States and The Permanent Court of International Justice:

Protocol of Signature and Statute Establishing the Permanent Court of
International Justice; List of States Accepting the Protocol; State-
ments by President Harding. Mr. Hughes, Mr. Root and Mr. Hoover
with regard to the Adherence of the United States to the Protocol;
The Organization of the Permanent Court of International Justice, by

Mr. John Bassett Moore. May, 1923.
187. The United States and Mexico: Notes and Official Statements regarding

the Recognition of Mexico; Agreement Between the Mexican Govern-
ment and the International Committee of Bankers on Mexico; De-
cision of the Supreme Court of Mexico in the Amparo Proceedings

instituted by the Texas Company of Mexico. June, 1923.
188. The Reduction of Armaments: Report of the Temporary Mixed Commis-
sion 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 Twenty-one Countries;
Draft Treaty of Mutual Guarantee; Statement by Nicholas Murray

Butler. July, 1923.
189. The Conference on Central American Affairs, held in Washington, D. C.

from December 4, 1922 to February 7, 1923: Texts of the Treaties,
Conventions and Protocols adopted, with an Introduction by Dr. Leo

S. Rowe, Director General of the Pan American Union. August, 1923. 190. Franco-German Reconciliation: Text of an address delivered July 8,

1923, at Paris, by Professor F. W. Foerster, formerly of the University
of Munich, before the annual meeting of the Advisory Council in
Europe of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Sep

tember, 1923.
191. Debate on Disarmament in the House of Commons, July 23. 1923. Re-

printed from the London Times, July 24, 1923. October, 1923. 192. The Development of the International Mind: An Address delivered

before the Academy of International Law'at The Hague, July 20, 1923.

by Nicholas Murray Butler. November, 1923.
193. Documents regarding the European Economic Situation. Series No. III:

Correspondence between Germany, the Allied Powers and the United
States relating to Reparations; Speech of General Smuts in London,

October 23, 1923. December, 1923
194. The Centenary of the Monroe Doctrine, by Charles Evans Hughes:

An Address delivered before the American Academy of Political and
Social Science at Philadelphia, November 30, 1923; American Cooper-

ation and World Peace, by David Jayne Hill. January, 1924.
Special Bulletin: Can the League of Nations Be Saved? By Sir Charles Walston.

November, 1923. Copies of the above, so far as they can be spared, will be sent to libraries and educational institutions for permanent preservation postpaid upon receipt of a request addressed to the Secretary of the American Association for International Conciliation.

A charge of five cents will be made for copies sent to individuals. Regular subscription rate twenty-five cents for one year, or one dollar for five years.

« ÎnapoiContinuați »