[1] The Flaw in the Covenant and the Remedy. Major David Davies, M.P.
"(a) Allow each nation an army sufficient to maintain internal order within its own boundaries, and sufficient also to furnish its quota for the League of Nations when required.
"(b) Ensure that the quota of any nation shall not be rendered useless by the employment of a new weapon of war by another nation.
"(c) Provide the League of Nations with an adequate force for immediate use.
"All the above essentials are incorporated in a scheme for an International Police Force. This scheme, which is given in the merest outline, is based on the assumption that our national security must always be absolutely safeguarded, and that before we decide on any relaxation of our armament policy we must be certain that the alternative offers complete protection." Other exponents emphasise this last essential. This reference to an International Police Force raises an important issue. Such a force must draw its personnel from the different nations. Without any doubt, one of the most important contributions from the nations is the fostering of organic chemical research and technical cadres which can only be maintained under true disarmament conditions by the redistributed organic chemical industries.
Viscount Grey—"Germany Must Disarm First."—Viscount Grey, at the public meeting in support of the League of Free Nations on October 10th, 1918, stated: "Germany must disarm first. She led the way up the hill in increasing expenditure on armaments. She must lead the way down the hill. That as a first condition, from our point of view, goes without saying. There can be no talk of disarmament until Germany, as the greater armer, is disarmed." One can only heartily agree with such expressions, but the denouement brings a sense of disappointment. There is a feeling that those who should be nearest are but groping for a solution. The peculiar significance of chemical warfare for the future is freely admitted in these utterances. Thus Major David Davies states: "If they had kept their intentions secret until they could utilise a thoroughly deadly gas in the general attack, it was more than possible that they would have completely broken the Allied line," and Lord Grey, "You cannot limit the amount of merchant ships or commercial aeroplanes, and the fewer the armaments, fighting aeroplanes, and ships of war, the more potential as weapons of war become the things which you use in commerce-ships, aeroplanes, chemicals of all kinds."
Left in this state the case is true but not complete. The essential point is that the new and telling types of armament will develop from these very peace industries. We are not merely concerned with their relative magnitude in a state of disarmament, but with the critical types which may develop from them.
So far, so good, but what steps are proposed to counter the menace? In reviewing what has been suggested by different responsible individuals, we find that the methods intended to cover armament limitation for the newer weapons fall into two classes.
Suggested Methods.—In the first place, it is suggested "that war's newest weapons—poison gas, aeroplanes, submarines, heavy artillery, and tanks, should be ceded to the League to form the Headquarter's Force, and that no state should be allowed to own them or to make use of any new invention for warlike purposes.
"There should be no delay in handing over the new arms before they can claim long traditions. Vested interests have not yet been created on a permanent footing. Great disturbance would not be caused at present by the suggestion of denationalisation."