MORAL SANCTION

The business of abolishing war goes merrily ahead, while the Japanese and Chinese continue to provide a cynical commentary to it. The Geneva Conference, in the short period during which it has been sitting, has already heard three more or less sweeping proposals for military reform. France's plan, calling for an international police force, is viewed as an oblique attempt to perpetuate the Peace of Versailles, while the English suggestion for a twenty-five percent reduction of armaments seems to be inspired chiefly by England's present economic plight. And yesterday the United States delegation offered a sweeping program for revision, including almost every type of weapon.

Important features of the American proposal are the limitation of tanks, the abolition of submarines and the abolition of poison gases. Unfortunately, no method of enforcing the abolition of these instruments is available, except by moral sanction. Events of the past months have not strengthened the world's faith in such paper phrases. It is impossible to believe that any nation would refrain from using such potent weapons in a major war, pledge or no pledge.

Idealistic proposals of this type have more value as Indications of the prevailing sentiment than as practical measures. The real hope for disarmament at the present time appears to lie in the economic situation, not in speeches which are lost in the rear of the Oriental cannon. No nation can now afford the expense of large scale war construction. That fact may at least induce the Geneva Convention to extend the Washington agreement, and perhaps complete it by securing the adherence of France.