Security

The Temporary Mixed Commission.

Article 8 of the Cov enant, to which we have referred, expressly charged the Council of the League of Nations with preparing plans for the reduction of armaments, which were to be submitted to the decision of the Governments ; and Article 9 instituted a permanent technical Commission which was to give its advice upon military, naval and aerial questions. In 1921, the League of Nations, whose tendency is to multiply Commissions, asked its Council to constitute a new consulting body which would study, in their entirety, the political and economic questions raised by the study of the reduction of armaments. This new organization was presided over by M. Viviani. It was called the Temporary Mixed Commission, and existed up to the 1924 session of the League of Nations Assembly.

When this commission assembled, one of its members, Lord Esher, suggested fixing a unity of comparison for land forces, such as the Washington Conference had done for naval armaments. The committee considered that armies are not the same thing as fleets, nor are military effectives like warships : that the number of soldiers is not the only factor to consider in the military strength of nations. This latter could not be expressed by a mathematical formula which took no account of either economic power, or of industrial resources. The commission pointed out that by reason of the character of war between armed nations, each nation possessed, behind the visible front of its peace time armaments, potential war-waging capacity. These conclusions were submitted to the League of Nations Assembly which, in its 1921 session, proposed that its Council should proceed to an enquiry into the armaments of the different countries since 1913; it demanded precise details about the different war budgets, about the requirements of national security in every country, about its international obligations. Thus, by degrees, the complexity of the disarmament problem appeared. Lord Robert Cecil therefore, in the Temporary Commission itself, proposed to solve the problem in a very general way, by offering to all the Governments guaran tees for the security of their countries, in return for their firm undertaking to reduce armaments. On the other hand, the Per manent Advisory Commission declared that all the guarantees would be inefficacious, unless a plan of defence were previously drawn up; and from that very point arose the question how can it be determined from which side comes the aggression. The mecha nism of the mutual guarantee was in itself a subject of discussion.

While Lord Robert Cecil contented himself with a general under taking, the French delegate, M. de Jouvenel, showed more confi dence in private treaties. It is a long time ago since Lord Chan cellor Bacon said "a mean must be observed in every doctrine, and science, and in the rules and axioms thereof, between the rocks of distinctions and the whirlpools of universalities." The third Assembly of the League of Nations (1922) adopted a celebrated resolution which is known by the name of "resolu tion XIV." and which, although trying to conciliate the themes under discussion, adopted, for the most part, the proposals of Lord Robert Cecil. It acknowledged that in the actual state of the world it was impossible for a great number of Governments to proceed to a serious reduction of armaments, if they had not sufficient guarantees for the security of their countries. These guarantees could be furnished by a defensive agreement open to all countries and resting upon a plan for defence preyiously drawn up. The Council of the League was to establish and submit to the different Governments the plan of political and military mecha nism calculated to realize and assure this resolution.

Draft Treaty for Mutual Assistance.

In conformity with resolution XIV., a draft of a treaty for mutual assistance was submitted to the League of Nations Assembly in its fourth session (1923) by the Temporary Mixed Commission. M. Beneg, the Czechoslovakian delegate, was the "rapporteur." According to him, the proposed treaty constituted a solemn pact of non aggression. It upheld the general assistance indicated by Lord Robert Cecil, but at the same time it contemplated particular defensive agreements, by which the signatory nations undertook to put into execution immediately, in case of aggression against one of them, the plan of assistance previously determined. As for the Council, it could immediately apply against the aggressor the sanctions provided by Article 16 of the Covenant ; it could nominate the Powers whose assistance it would claim ; determine the forces which each of them was to put at its disposal ; appoint the commander-in-chief, and prepare a plan of financial co-opera tion between the States. Lastly, Beneg suggested that the Council should at once propose an armistice to the belligerents, specifying that the State which refused to accept it should be considered as the aggressor, and adding that the mutual assistance would only come into force after the States signatory to the treaty had reduced their armaments.