The broadcast speech of Mr. Cordell Hull, US. Secretary of State on the clear-cut issues which are facing the. world is a most important pronouncement and one which should commend itself to the attention of alf thinking people, "Is the fulure of the world," he asks, "to be determined by universal reliance jon armed force and frequent aggression, autarchy, impoverishment, and international anarchy, or are the will for peace, morality. {justice based on economic well-being, security fand progress to prevail?" On the manner in which the world answers that question in the not too distant future depends to a very great extent the fate of this present civilization. But the future does not wholly depend upon that. Tt must be borne in mind that while economic evils are the greatest contributing factor to the present universal unrest, the military ambitions of-certain nations are not [wholly inspired by economic. wrongs, and there are still those " people in existence which look forward to world domination just eagerly as those would-be conquerors of the past. Those mon were not actuated by economic motives: they knew nothing about such things, and all that animated them was the lust for conquest, Fortunately economic considerations predominate, and even have their effect upon the martial ambitions of such nations. The rapid downfall of the world from the comparatively high state of international morality which had been reach-Jed prior to the Great War, was not entirely [due to that catastrophe, though there can be little doubt that the economic ills which fol lowed in its train are responsible for the deplorable state of affairs at present prevailing in the world. 'The quick growth of 1 narrow spirit of nationalism, offset the attempts at the establishment of that] internationalism which inspired the found-Jers of the League of Nations, and eventually'
Jed to its present powerless condition. It economic in origin. In the face of Jdwindling world trade, nations sought at Toast to save their home markets for themselves. Trade barriers arose on all sides and with them a sense: of growing irritation.
Great Britain and the United States appear to have been the first to realize that the abolition of those hindrances to the free circulation of international commerce was the preliminary step towards universal appease~ ment. On occasions they have sought to reach mutual agreement whereby the trade between the two countries would be improved, and while in the past such attempts have not succeeded there is still substantial hope that the present negotiations, long] Jdrawn-out as they have been, will eventually attain success. Should that prove to be the case, it is to be hoped that other nations will follow suit. It does not necessarily follow that they will, for those nations which fare building up an economy on the basis of preparations against eventual war, are not [swayed by quite the same principles. They fare endeavouring to do with a litre possible of those things which they cannot produce within their own borders. They will not completely succeed, but the greater their success, the less will they wish, or be able {to contribute to the general improvement of {the economic situation which is so eminently desirable, Thus the sharp division in political ideologies, finds a parallel in the diver-[gence between economics conceived as 9 [contribution to peace, and economies founded, Jon the preparation for war, a divergence ax wide as civilian and military concepts are bound to be. Trade barriers which prevent the access of nations to the world's supply Jof raw material should be removed, but it must not be forgotten that in the case of the nations suffering or complaining of suffering from lack of such access it is often due not to the refusal to sell, but their own inability to buy. General removal of the obstacles to] free trade in manufactured goods might pro-wide them with the wherewithal, but it is clear that unti! such would-be purchasing nations are by their exports enabled to ac-Jauire exchange for financing the importation Jor raw materials that portion of the problem cannot easily be got out of the way.
It is because of the existence of such conditions that Mr. Hull's plea for international [ce-operation is so powerful. The heeded re-fon cannot be achieved by the isolated action of one or two nations, but by the general adoption of the universal policy' Which he advocates. His enunciation of the American creed in international politics is imposing, but, before it can be made effec tive, there will have to be a very considerable change in the general sentiments of the world at large. Collective security, as much Jan example of international ce-operation as anything devised since the Great War, is under a cloud. It was an ideal which should, given general good will, have proved useful to humanity, but clashing ambitions, the iniquities of the peace treaties, and individual aspirations have postponed the possibility of future success indefinitely. A great deal de ends upon the remaining democracies of the world. The claims of totalitarian leaders that democracy is tottering to its final collapse have nothing to support them. The fact that certain nations have chosen other political reeds need not necessarily be a weakening factor, for the degree of their democracy before they made the present cleavages was never so great as to support the suggestion that their defection constituted any great blow. to the general principles. If Great Britain, France and the United States can show 10 the world such ce-operation as is being shown with regard to the exchange agreement, if the burning question bound up in the negotiations for the Anglo-American trade agreement can be solved, if it can be shown to the world at large' that present barriers can be removed, then there may be some hope for the future. For it must be remembered that there is a solidarity of tra~ dition behind the remaining democracies which the totalitarian states have not yet, and, probably, never will acquire, 'That docs not' mean that the democracies should not ce-operate with the autarchies, but it is apparent that the considerations which dominate the policies of the latter, place upon them limitations operating against the fullest cooperation which is desirable in world interests. But even were it limited, it might still prove more than a little acceptable, and possibly somewhat of a contribution to the settlement of all these urgent problems.
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.