More decisive than the Chaco affair was the League's settle ment of the difficulties between Peru and Colombia over Leticia. Here the Council, supported by the United States, was able to insist that Peru evacuate Colombian territory and that the two nations negotiate their differences. Administration of the dis puted territory by an international commission for one year facilitated a successful solution. Again, Great Britain, in refer ring to the Council a dispute growing out of the cancellation by the Persian government of a concession granted to the Anglo Persian Oil Company, showed a noteworthy readiness to submit to international review a matter in which her interests were in volved.
Other Problems.—Deserved credit may be accorded the League for its handling of two serious European situations in the winter of In the dispute between Yugoslavia and Hun gary arising from the assassination of King Alexander, the ominous parallel to the events of 1914 stimulated the Council to efforts which resulted in a compromise formula agreed to by both parties, and the threatened conflict was averted.
More alarming still was the tension which developed between France and Germany over the Saar plebiscite. As the date ap proached for the taking of the vote which was to determine whether the territory would remain under the control of the League, go over to France, or return to Germany, feeling ran high. Intense German propaganda led to fear of reprisals should the vote go against her, or even of a putsch in advance of the plebiscite.
But upon the League Council rested the duty of ensuring fair ness, order, and secrecy in the voting. These heavy responsibil ities it turned over to a specially appointed Plebiscite Commis sion, backed by an international police force, responsible to the League, and composed of troops from Great Britain, Italy, The Netherlands and Sweden, which marched into the Saar a month before the plebiscite. Under the careful safeguards planned by the Commission, with agreements against reprisals secured by the Council, and with well worked out advance plans' for the transfer of the territory, the plebiscite was taken with "discipline and dignity." The vote was for the Fatherland, and on March 1, 1935 the Saar was turned over by the League to Germany.
Disarmament.—In no other field has the blighting effect of nationalism been more apparent than in the attempts of the League to obtain reduction and limitation of armaments, for such an agreement would imply greater, rather than less, confidence in the value of international co-operation.
The World Disarmament Conference, so long planned, was finally convened in February, 1932. But as in previous disarma ment discussions, this conference was soon lost in a maze of con flicting proposals, each nation seeking to improve its own relative status by suggesting the reduction or abolition of those weapons essential to potential opponents and the retention of those con sidered necessary to its own national defence. Two principles did,
however, emerge, namely that the possibility of aggression should be diminished by the reduction of offensive arms, and that the execution of the future disarmament convention should be super vised by a Permanent Disarmament Commission. In September, 1932 Germany brought the Conference face to face with her de mand for equality in arms by refusing to participate further in its work until her claims were met. Recognition by the great powers of the principle of equality of rights under a system assuring the security of all nations, and an expression of their in tention to effect an immediate and substantial reduction of arma ments induced her to return in December, 1932. Then came Hitler's rise to power early in 1933. The fear and suspicion aroused by the new National Socialist Government in Germany so terrified her neighbours as to make immediate reduction of arms impossible. When further delays were therefore interposed, Ger many not only withdrew from the Conference but resigned from the League. Although the Conference technically remains in ses sion and committees are at work on specific problems, no full ses sions have been held since 1933. Not only Germany's open re armament, but more recently the new threat to peace from Italy, have relegated any talk of reduction still further to the back ground. The most recent real advance was made late in 1934, when interest centred upon an American proposal for interna tional regulation of both public and private manufacture of arms under a permanent disarmament commission.
A feverish striving on the part of all governments for self contained nationalism has resulted in the failure of all attempts by the League to secure reduction of trade barriers. A conven tion finally agreed upon for the abolition of import and export prohibitions failed to go into effect for want of sufficient ratifica tions. A similar fate befell a project for a tariff truce. Another proposal looking toward a lowering of tariffs was the ambitious scheme for a federation of European states, fathered by M. Briand. This, too, has been overwhelmed by the prevailing tend ency toward autarchy. The London Economic Conference con vened by the League at the request of the Lausanne Conference in a desperate attempt to end the depression by simultaneous in ternational action ended in almost complete failure.