Potential causes of war confront us on every hand. Peace has not come.
Our military men tell us that getting ready for war is the way to
peace. It is their duty to prepare the nation for war. This method,
however, will not bring peace. It will only hasten another world war,
and that would fatally weaken our white civilization.
To possess peace with justice and security, we must build machinery
adequate to settle all international disputes that might cause war,
and we must create behind the machinery a world opinion so strong that
no nation will defy it. Small national armed forces theoretically
can supplement world opinion, but the reliance must be on world
opinion. Competitive armaments, the result of fear or ambition, must
be progressively abolished by international agreement. International
understanding and goodwill must be consistently cultivated beginning in
the schools. The road to peace is a long uphill road.
For machinery we shall require a court for our legal disputes and a
town meeting of the world for the rest. I favor immediate adherence
to the existing World Court with the Hughes reservations. For the
world town meeting, I believe that we should join the existing League
of Nations with reservations on Articles X and XVI in order that we
may avoid both legal and moral commitments to use either military or
economic force. These seem to me to be the first two steps towards
peace.
The third step is the outlawry of war. Since this will involve
sacrifice of sovereignty in certain respects for the sake of peace,
with a voluntary agreement to submit to the proper tribunal all
disputes that threaten war, it requires a higher development of the
will to peace than does the creation of the Court and League. It will
fail if attempted as a political device to perpetuate the _status quo_.
It can succeed only when the nations, and especially the great powers,
are willing to be just, have a reasonable appreciation of one another’s
problems, and are actuated by a fair degree of goodwill.
The Geneva Protocol for the Pacific Settlement of International
Disputes and Senator Borah’s proposal for the outlawry of war should be
studied together in the light of the concrete problems to be solved,
especially the political and human problems. I believe that the
provision for “sanctions” to be automatically applied is impracticable.
A conference for the reduction and limitation of land, sea, and air
armaments is imperatively needed in the interest of economy and
world peace. No one knows how soon such a conference can be held
with reasonable assurance of even partial success. All nations must
participate. I believe that a conference of this kind would now be more
fruitful if held in Geneva than if held in Washington.
The interim policy for the United States should be to avoid increasing
armaments, holding “defense days,” and the like. Our aggressive and
growing militarism is bringing us no added security and is engendering
fear and suspicion at home and abroad. On the other hand, as mighty
armaments give a sense of security and stability――albeit a mistaken
sense――I expect no substantial reduction by America alone.