78. The Third Committee began its deliberations on the Assembly resolution on arbitration, security and disarmament on the 9th September, under the presidency of M. Duca (Roumania) (subsequently replaced by M. Politis [Greece]), and the proceedings opened with a general discussion, which was continued until the 13th. Lord Parmoor and Mr. Henderson represented the British Empire.
79. After the method of procedure had been settled, a statement was made expressing the standpoint of the British Delegation on the questions of arbitration under the three heads of arbitration, court decisions and conciliation, and the views then expressed were maintained at the subsequent meetings. A shortreference was made to the question of sanctions, but any detail was avoided in order to leave room for free discussion with the members of the French Delegation. The note of the British Government on the Draft Treaty of Mutual Assistance was referred to as expressing the final view and not requiring any further comment.
80. Most of the speakers devoted some time to a statement of the views of their Governments on the Draft Treaty of Mutual Assistance, against which the main objections urged were the uncertainty in regard to the definition of aggression, the too wide discretion and powers conferred upon the Council and the evils attendant on the system of "complementary agreements" sanctioned by the Treaty. The first defect might now be remedied by the extension of the system of arbitration, which would simplify the definition of aggression. As regards the "complementary agreements," even those who recognized their harmful possibilities were compelled to admit that they could not be abolished or prevented, and that their power for evil might be lessened if they were controlled and brought within a general scheme of mutual assistance under the League.
81. All the speakers were in substance agreed that the Covenant itself afforded the best basis for any scheme of mutual assistance; that it needed only to be developed and carried to its logical conclusion in order that it might provide an adequate basis of security.
82. In summing up the debate the President observed that there appeared to be general agreement on the interdependence of the three problems of arbitration, security and disarmament, and on the point that a complete system could be evolved from the Covenant itself. Everyone was prepared to accept the principle of economic and financial sanctions, though some difference might exist on the subject of military sanctions. Little had been said about disarmament, which could only follow as a consequence of the solution of the twin problems of arbitration and security.
83. It was then agreed, on the morning of the 13th September, to appoint a sub-committee of representatives of twelve Delegations to formulate concrete proposals.
84. The sub-committee, known as the Fourth Sub-Committee of the Third Committee, was composed as follows:—
Lord Parmoor or Mr. Henderson (British Empire).M. Paul-Boncour (France).M. Schanzer (Italy).M. Branting (Sweden).M. Benes (Czechoslovakia).M. Villegas (Chile).M. Kalfov (Bulgaria).M. Poullet (Belgium).M. Titulesco (Roumania).Mr. Matsuda (Japan).M. Lange (Norway).M. Skrzynski (Poland).
85. The sub-committee met for the first time on the afternoon of the 13th September, under the presidency of Dr. Benes. The first meeting was occupied by a discussion on procedure. In the first instance, it was proposed to appoint a drafting committee of three members to draw up proposals, keeping in close touch with a similar committee to be appointed by the First Committee, but this idea was subsequently abandoned, and the President was requested to draw up the outline of a scheme, to be submitted to the sub-committee, if possible, on the 15th September. This the President undertook to do, but he was only able to submit his proposals for the first time on the 16th September. The delay was due mainly to the necessity of consulting with representatives of the First Committee and with certain Delegations. In particular, meetings were held on the 15th September between representatives of the French and British Delegations who went carefully through the scheme and reached a preliminary agreement on a number of points of principle. This agreement greatly facilitated the eventual completion of the work.
86. These proposals were in the form of a draft Protocol, of which articles 1, 2, 3 and 5 concerned the First Committee, and have already been dealt with in the preceding section of this report. The remaining articles, as originally proposed, may be summarised as follows:—
87.Article4.—The Council or the Permanent Court may appoint International Control Commissions, composed of civilian and military experts, to ensure that during the course of the arbitral procedure none of the parties makes preparations for economic or military mobilisation.
88.Article6 recommends the establishment of demilitarised zones and their control, if desired, by the League of Nations.
89.Article7.—As soon as the declaration of aggression has been made, the obligations of the signatories in regard to the sanctions of all kinds in article 16, paragraphs 1 and 2, of the Covenant will immediately become operative against the aggressor. These obligations to be interpreted as obliging each of the Members of the League to co-operate loyally and effectively in support of the Covenant of the League and in resistance to any act of aggression.
90. In accordance with article 16 of the Covenant the signatories undertake, individually or collectively, to come to the assistance of the State attacked or threatened, and to give each other mutual support by means of facilities and reciprocal exchanges as regards supplies of raw materials and food-stuffs of every kind, openings of credits, transports, transit, and for this purpose to ensure the safety of the land and sea communications of the attacked or threatened State.
91. If both parties to the dispute are declared aggressors according to the above provisions, the economic sanctions to be applied to both of them.
92.Article7A.—The Council of the League of Nations to instruct the Economic and Financial Committees, Temporary Mixed Commission and Permanent Advisory Commission to draw up (1) plans of action for establishing the blockade ofthe aggressor State, and (2) plans of economic and financial co-operation between the State attacked and the different States assisting it.
93.Article8.—The Council to be entitled to accept individual or collective undertakings entered into by States, determining in advance the military forces which they would immediately place at the Council's disposal in order to carry out the measures decided upon, in accordance with the preceding articles.
94. When the aggressor has been designated, the signatories may, in accordance with undertakings previously entered into, place in the field the whole, or such proportion as they may consider necessary, of their military forces against the aggressor.
95.Article8A.—In view of article 10 of the Covenant, the above sanctions must not include the violation of the political or territorial independence of the aggressor.
96.Article9.—The signatories to take part as soon as possible in an International Conference for the Reduction of Armaments under the auspices of the League. The Council to draw up the programme for this Conference.
97. If, within a time limit of (Transcriber's note: blank space in source) after the coming into force of the Protocol, the Conference has not met, or the scheme for the reduction of armaments drawn up by it has not been adopted and carried out, the Council may record the fact, and each signatory shall regain its freedom of action.
98. If, during the time limit specified above, a dispute arises, the provisions in the Protocol to be applicable in full.
99.Supplementary Clause(to be inserted in article 9).—The conditions in which the Council may declare that the scheme of the International Conference has not been carried out, shall be defined by the Conference itself.
100.Article10.—Differences relating to the carrying out or interpretation of the Protocol to be submitted to the Permanent Court of International Justice.
101.Article11.—The Protocol to be open for signature byall States, to be ratified, and the ratifications to be deposited with the League. The Protocol to come into force between the signatories ratifying it, as from the date of ratification.
102. The sub-committee held eight meetings in all, finishing its work on the 22nd September. The articles were not discussed in their numerical order, and a discussion of one article was often adjourned while the examination of another article was begun. As it is not attempted here to give a full summary of the discussions, it will perhaps be convenient to take the articles in order and show what modifications were introduced.
103.Article4.—Objection was raised to this article, mainly on the ground that it gave the Council or the Permanent Court too wide powers of interference, and introduced the idea of a "super-State." After consultation with other Delegations, the British Delegation produced an alternative draft which was adopted, and which was substantially embodied in the eventual Protocol itself (becoming article 7). The only essential difference between this draft and the eventual text was that the former provided, in paragraph 2, that the investigations should be carried out "by the organisation set up by the Conference for the Reduction of Armaments to ensure respect for the decisions of that Conference.
104.Article6.—Words were inserted to the effect that demilitarised zones were recommended "as a means of avoiding violations of the present Protocol." They were to be placed under the supervision of the Council at the request "and at the expense" of one or more of the conterminous States.
105.Article7.—There was considerable discussion on the first paragraph, and some demand for a distinction to be drawn, as in the Covenant, between economic and financial sanctions on the one hand, and military sanctions on the other. It was, however, explained that the proposed definition of the aggressor had produced a clearer situation, in which there was no reason why the application of sanctions of all kinds under article 16 of the Covenant should not be justified. It was pointed out that thewording of this first paragraph was illogical. The "obligations" could not "become operative against an aggressor." Accordingly, it was agreed to substitute the words "the obligations will immediately come into force in order that the sanctions provided may immediately become operative." The paragraph was then passed with the above amendment.
106. Exception was taken to the words in the third paragraph "undertake individually or collectively to come to the assistance." It might prove difficult to evolve collective plans, and it was agreed, on the proposal of the British Delegate, to substitute the words "give a joint and several undertaking to."
107. In the same paragraph the use of the expression "to ensure the safety of the land and sea communications of the attacked or threatened State" was questioned in the first place, because it seemed that it might imply naval or military operations. In reply, it was pointed out that the words in the same sentence "for this purpose" showed that this paragraph related solely to economic and financial sanctions. In the second place the word "ensure" was objected to, on the score that to undertake to ensure communications might be to undertake an impossibility. Finally, the words "take measures to preserve the safety of communications" were substituted. It was further pointed out that these provisions were to be applied to protect an attacked or threatened State and that a similar distinction was expressly contained in the Covenant.
108.Article7A.—The British Delegation desired a redraft of this article, taking exception in particular to sub-paragraph (1), in which the word "blockade" seemed to suggest belligerent naval action. They at first suggested omitting all words after "Council of the League of Nations" and substituting "shall, as soon as possible after the Protocol has been ratified, take steps to ascertain from each of the signatories what organisation or legislation is necessary to give effect to the economic and financial sanctions." An alternative suggestion from another quarter was to substitute the words "putting into force the economic andfinancial sanctions against" for the words "establishing the blockade of" in sub-paragraph (1). It was agreed to combine both amendments—to adopt the British text above, and to begin a second paragraph with the words "When in possession of this information the Council shall draw up, through its competent organs: (1) plans of action for the application of the economic and financial sanctions of article 16 of the Covenant against an aggressor State," &c.
109. Later, the British Delegation proposed to redraft the first paragraph in the form in which it finally appears in the Protocol (having become article 12), to delete the remainder, and to substitute "It shall communicate this report to the members of the League and to the other signatories." The redraft of the first paragraph was accepted, but it was decided to allow the second paragraph to stand, as amended above.
110.Article8.—The British Delegation had objections to raise against both paragraphs of this article. In the first paragraph they objected to the words "place at the Council's disposal," and the second paragraph they regarded as an attempt to revert to what was the operative principle of the Draft Treaty of Mutual Assistance.
111. They suggested as an alternative text:—
"Having regard to the fact that military sanctions are foreseen in article 16 of the Covenant, the Council may receive undertakings from States fixing in advance the military forces which they would be willing to employ against a Member of the League which was declared to be an aggressor.
"In view of the right of Members of the League to enter into such arrangements with the Council, no agreement shall in future be concluded between States Members of the League, providing for military action to be taken by them."
112. It became evident that the sub-committee could not be induced to accept the second paragraph of this alternative text, and it was accordingly withdrawn. Exception was also takento the words in the first paragraph, "against a Member of the League," &c., and it was agreed to substitute the words, "to ensure the fulfilment of the obligations in regard to sanctions which result from the Covenant and the present Protocol."
113. The French Delegation then proposed that the article should read:—
"In view of the contingent military, naval and air sanctions provided for in article 16 of the Covenant, and article 7 of the present Protocol, the Council shall be entitled to receive undertakings entered into by States determining in advance the military, naval and air forces which they would bring into action immediately to ensure the fulfilment of the obligations in regard to sanctions which result from the Covenant and the present Protocol.
"When the aggressor is designated, the signatory States may, moreover, place in the field, in accordance with agreements previously entered into, the whole or such part of their military, naval and air forces as they may consider necessary for the assistance of a State which shall have been the victim of aggression.
"The obligations of the second paragraph shall be duly registered and published by the League of Nations, and shall remain open for adherence by any State Member of the League which so desires."
114. It was the right of States, as the matter then stood, to enter into special agreements with one another for determining in advance the military, naval and air forces which they would bring to the assistance of one another under the conditions indicated. Under the Protocol, these special agreements would only come into force when the Council had decided which State is the aggressor: they would simply provide means for applying rapidly the sanctions prescribed in the Covenant and the Protocol.
115. Before, however, agreeing to this text a statement was made on behalf of the British Delegation, expressing regret that the sub-committee had not seen its way to make the Protocol an instrument whereby the League would only act as a whole. It was, however, recognised that the last paragraph introducedan improvement, as, if separate agreements must exist, it would be better that they should be registered with the League. "But that does not alter the fact that you are making provision on the face of a new document for that which has been turned down in connection with the Draft Treaty of Mutual Assistance." Further opposition to the draft article was not pressed, but the British Delegation made known their desire that words should be recorded expressing regret that the League was not to act as a whole, and to set its face "like flint against anything like the old balance of power by allowing these regional pacts to go on under this new instrument." The above text was then adopted.
116.Article8A.—The British Delegation proposed that the article should read: "Shall not affect the territorial integrity or political independence of the aggressor State." This was agreed to, and it was also decided to prefix a paragraph relating to the costs of military, naval or air operations, similar to article 10 of the Draft Treaty of Mutual Assistance.
117.Article9.—Objection was raised by the British Delegation to the last paragraph of article 9, and they moved that the following be substituted:—
"The provisions of the present Protocol in regard to arbitration and sanctions shall come into force when the scheme for the reduction of armaments, drawn up by the International Conference, has been effectively carried out in accordance with the conditions fixed by the Conference itself."
118. The French Delegation maintained strongly that the Protocol must be brought into operation before the International Conference could meet. The British Delegation offered a compromise with the suggestion that their Government might sign the Protocol, and ask Parliament to approve it before the Conference met. But preparatory arrangements for the Conference should go on concurrently. Directly agreement was reached by the Conference, ratifications could 'be deposited. As this failed to meet the views of the French Delegation, the BritishDelegation made a final proposal whereby endeavours should be made to secure ratification and deposit of ratifications before the Conference met, provided the Protocol itself contained a provision to the effect that it should only become operative when the International Conference reached a conclusion. The French Delegation indicated their willingness in principle to accept this, but wished to consider an actual text.
119. At the next meeting the Chairman submitted the following version:—
"The undersigned Members of the League of Nations undertake to participate in an International Conference for the Reduction of Armaments which shall be convened by the Council of the League and shall meet at Geneva on Monday, the 15th June, 1925. States not Members of the League of Nations shall be invited to this Conference.
"The ratifications of the present Protocol shall be deposited with the Secretariat of the League of Nations at the latest by the 1st May, 1925. If at least fifteen Members of the League, of which four are permanently represented on the Council, have not deposited their ratification by the 1st, May 1925, the Secretary-General of the League shall cancel the invitations.
"The entry into force of the present Protocol shall be suspended until a plan for the reduction of armaments has been adopted by the Conference.
"With a view to the summoning of the latter, the Council, taking into account the undertakings contained in articles 7 and 8 of the present Protocol, will prepare a general programme for the reduction of armaments which will be placed at the disposal of the Conference.
"If, within a period of (Transcriber's note: blank space in source) after the adoption of the plan for the reduction of armaments, that plan has not been carried out, the Council shall make a declaration to that effect; this declaration shall under the present Protocol be null and void.
"The grounds on which the Council may declare that the plan drawn up by the International Conference for the Reduction of Armaments has not been carried out, and that in consequence the presentrendered null and void, shall be laid down by the Conference itself.
"A signatory State which, after the expiration of the period fixed above, fails to comply with the plan adopted by the Conference, shall not be admitted to benefit by the application of sanctions provided in the present Protocol."
120. The sub-committee adopted a proposal to add to the third paragraph "and communicated to Governments two months previously." In view of representations made by the Japanese Delegation, this was subsequently altered to "and communicated to Governments at the earliest possible date, and at the latest three months before the Conference meets."
121. The Swedish Delegation proposed that a clause should be added to the effect that "the present Protocol in no way effects obligations arising out of the Covenant." It was agreed that a clause to this effect could be either added or inserted as a separate article. The latter alternative was eventually adopted (see article 19 of the final Protocol).
122. After some discussion, the number of ratifications required in paragraph 2 of this article was finally fixed as now provided in the Protocol (see paragraph 4 of article 21 of the final Protocol).
(N. B.—The Joint Drafting Committee of the First and Third Committees made a final revise of the whole text, with a view to checking the wording of the various articles, their logical arrangement, &c. In the course of this work they removed paragraphs 3, 5, 6 and 7 of this article and incorporated them in the "ratification" article of the final Protocol—No. 21.)
123.Article10.—The British Delegation proposed the suppression of the words "carrying out." It was decided to consult the First Committee on this point. (The words are omitted in the final Protocol.)
124.Article11.—In view of the new text of article 9, it was decided to omit the second paragraph of this article.
125. This concluded the work of the sub-committee, andthe text of the above articles of the Protocol were submitted to the Third Committee on the 22nd September.
Dr. Benes, as chairman andrapporteurof the sub-committee, made a general report on the sub-committee's work, and it was then agreed to discuss the articles seriatim.
126. OnArticle4 a debate ensued on an objection raised by the Italian Delegation to the proposal that investigations should be carried out by the organisation to be set up by the International Conference. In the first place, they disliked the idea of a permanent organ of investigation—they considered that, if an investigation were necessary, this should be carried out by a special body appointed for the purpose if and when the occasion arose. In the second place, they suggested that it would be improper to anticipate, in the Protocol, any decision that the International Conference might take. The British Delegation explained that this proposal had been inserted in their draft merely as a matter of convenience: thinking that it would be necessary for the Conference to appoint some body to ensure that the decisions of the Conference were carried out, it had seemed to them that it would be only duplicating labour for any other body to be set up by the Council to carry out these special investigations. The Italian Delegation finally suggested that the text should run, "such enquiries and investigations shall be carried out with the utmost possible despatch, and the signatory States undertake to afford every facility for carrying them out." This was accepted, with the consequential amendment to the fourth paragraph, which should now begin: "If, as a result of these enquiries and investigations, any infraction," &c. The article thus adopted became article 7 of the final Protocol.
127.Articles5and6 were adopted without modification, becoming articles 10 and 9 respectively of the final Protocol.
128.Article7.—Owing to a change introduced by the First Committee in the text of article 5, in consequence of which it was no longer incumbent on the Council to make a declaration of aggression, it became necessary to alter the wording of the beginning of article 7. It was decided that this should run, "Assoon as the Council has called upon the signatory States to apply sanctions against the aggressor State, in accordance with article 6, the obligations," &c.
129. In paragraph 2 the words "signatory States" were substituted for "Members of the League."
130. The article as a whole came in for some criticism, mainly from the Netherlands and Scandinavian Delegations. Certain remarks made by Dr. Benes in introducing the text to the Third Committee had caused misgivings to those Delegations, who wished to be assured that the obligations in this article did not go beyond those of article 16 of the Covenant. They observed, as had members of the sub-committee, that the distinction drawn in the Covenant between economic and financial sanctions on the one hand, and military, naval and aerial sanctions on the other, had disappeared from the present text, and they sought a clear declaration that no fresh obligations were incurred in regard to the latter category, and that each Member of the League retained the right to decide its own course of action. In the course of his reply Dr. Benes said, "the real application of the sanctions will always be within the province of the Government themselves, and true co-operation will always take place by direct contract between the Governments." The Danish Delegation were not entirely satisfied, and moved to alter the second paragraph so as to make it read, "co-operate loyally and effectively in the carrying out of the obligations provided for in article 16 of the Covenant." After consultation with therapporteur, they abandoned this amendment, and declared themselves satisfied with the addition to paragraph 2 of the words, "in the degree which its geographical position and its particular situation as regards armaments allow." As thus amended, the article was adopted, and became article 11 of the final Protocol.
131.Article7A was adopted without amendment, becoming article 12 of the final Protocol.
132.Article8.—The change, referred to above, in the text of article 5, rendered necessary an alteration in the wording of the second paragraph of this article, which it was agreed shouldbegin: "Furthermore, as soon as the Council has called upon the signatory States to apply sanctions, as provided," &c.
133. In the same paragraph it was decided to omit the words, "the whole or such part of," and make it read, "bring to the assistance of a particular State, which is the victim of aggression, their military, naval and air forces." With these modifications, the article was adopted, and became article 13 of the final Protocol.
134.Article8A was adopted, and figures as article 15 in the final Protocol. It was suggested that an addition should be made to this article to the effect that "the Council shall alone be competent to declare that the application of sanctions shall cease and normal conditions be re-established." The Committee decided that this should be inserted as a separate article, and it appears in the final Protocol as article 14.
135.Articles9and10 were adopted without modification, article 9 being embodied, as explained, in articles 17 and 21 of the final Protocol, and article 10 becoming article 20.
136. The text of an additional article (which became article 19 of the final Protocol) was also approved.
After the work of the First and Third Committees had been concluded, the reports of these Committees were submitted as a whole to the Assembly. The Assembly unanimously, with the assent of every Delegation represented at that time in the Assembly, approved the reports so presented them, and passed the resolutions, the text of which has already been published.[3]
We are,Sir,
Your obedient servants,ARTHUR HENDERSON.PARMOOR.GILBERT MURRAY.CECIL J. B. HURST.
The Right. Hon.J. RAMSAY MACDONALD, M. P.,&c. &c. &c.
[1] Miscellaneous No. 13 (1924), Cmd. 2200.
[2] See Annex C, p. 156.
[3] See Annex D, p. 210.
ARTICLE 1.—The High Contracting Parties solemnly declare that aggressive war is an international crime. They severally undertake not to be guilty of its commission.
ARTICLE 2.—A State engaging in war for other than purposes of defense commits the international crime described in Article 1.
ARTICLE 3.—The Permanent Court of International Justice shall have jurisdiction, on the complaint of any signatory, to make a judgment to the effect that the international crime described in Article 1 has or has not in any given case been committed.
ARTICLE 4.—The High Contracting Parties solemnly declare that acts of aggression, even when not amounting to a state of war, and preparations for such acts of aggression, are hereafter to be deemed forbidden by international law.
ARTICLE 5.—In the absence of a state of war, measures of force by land, by sea or in the air taken by one State against another and not taken for the purpose of defense against aggression or for the protection of human life shall be deemed to be acts of aggression.
General or partial mobilisation may be deemed to be preparation for an act of aggression.
Any signatory which claims that another signatory has violated any of the terms of this Declaration shall submit its case to the Permanent Court of International Justice.
A signatory refusing to accept the jurisdiction of the Court in any such case shall be deemed an aggressor within the terms of this Declaration.
Failure to accept the jurisdiction of the Court within four days after notification of submission of a claim of violation of this Declaration shall be deemed a refusal to accept the jurisdiction.
ARTICLE 6.—The Court shall also have jurisdiction on the complaint of any signatory to make a judgment to the effect that there has or has not in any given case been committed a violation of international law within the terms of Article 4.
ARTICLE 7.—The Court shall, in any case, have the power to indicate, if it considers that circumstances so require, any provisional measures which ought to be taken to reserve the respective rights of either party.
Pending the final decision, notice of the measures suggested shall forthwith be given to the parties.
ARTICLE 8.—In the event of any H.C.P. having been adjudged an aggressor pursuant to this Declaration, all commercial, trade, financial and property interests of the aggressor shall cease to be entitled, either in the territory of the other signatories or onthe high seas, to any privileges, protection, rights or immunities accorded by either international law, national law or treaty.
Any H.C.P. may in such case take such steps towards the severence of trade, financial, commercial and personal intercourse with the aggressor and its nationals as it may deem proper and the H.C.P. may also consult together in this regard.
The period during which any such economic sanction may be continued shall be fixed at any time by the Court at the request of any signatory.
In the matter of measures of force to be taken, each signatory shall consult its own interests and obligations.
ARTICLE 9.—If any H.C.P. shall be adjudged an aggressor by the Permanent Court of International Justice, such Power shall be liable for all damage to all other H.C.P. resulting from its aggression.
ARTICLE 10.—The H.C.P. agree to accept the judgment of the Permanent Court of International Justice as to the fulfilment of violation of the contracts of this Declaration.
Any question arising under this Declaration isipso factowithin the jurisdiction of the Court.
ARTICLE 11.—If a dispute arising under this Declaration shall be submitted to the Permanent Court of International Justice, it is for the Court to decide as to its jurisdiction and also whether or not its decree has been complied with.
ARTICLE 12.—The High Contracting Parties, recognising that excessive armaments constitute a menace of war, agree to participate in the Permanent Advisory Conference on Disarmament decided upon by the Fifth Assembly of the League of Nations.
ARTICLE 13.—The present Declaration shall be ratified. The ratifications shall be deposited as soon as possible with the Secretary General of the League of Nations.
Any signatory to this Declaration desiring to withdraw therefrom may give notice thereof to the Secretary-General of the League of Nations. Such notice shall take effect one year from the date of deposit thereof and only as to the signatory so withdrawing.
Notice of each ratification and of each withdrawal shall be communicated by the Secretary-General of the League of Nations to each signatory hereto.
1. The Assembly unanimously declares its approval of the Declaration Outlawing Aggressive War which was prepared by the Third Committee of the Assembly and submitted to the Assembly for its approval.
2. The said Declaration shall be submitted within the shortest possible time to the Members of the League of Nations for adoption in the form of a protocol duly ratified and declaring their recognition of this Declaration. It shall be the duty of the Council to submit the Declaration to the Members.
The said protocol shall likewise remain open for signature by States not Members of the League of Nations.
3. As soon as this protocol has been ratified by the majority of the Members of the League the said Declaration shall go into force.
1. The Assembly, having considered the Report of the Temporary Mixed Commission and having also considered the replies of the various Governments commenting on the proposed Treaty of Mutual Assistance, reaffirms the principles set forth in Resolution 14 of the Third Assembly,
2. Furthermore, the Assembly is of the opinion that all theNations of the world, whether or not Members of the League of Nations, should agree
a. to limit or reduce their armaments to the basis necessary for the maintenance of peace and national security.
b. to study the ways and means for future reduction of armaments either as between all Nations or as between any two of them.
3. The Assembly is further of the opinion that reciprocal agreements between two or more neighbouring countries for the establishment of demilitarised zones would facilitate the security necessary to progressive disarmament.
4. In order to facilitate the reduction and limitation of armaments, the Assembly requests the Council to call a Permanent Advisory Conference upon disarmament which shall meet periodically at intervals of not less than once every three years.
Invitations to participate in this Permanent Conference shall be sent to all Nations whether Members of the League or not.
The said Conference should from time to time consider the further codifying of the principles of international law particularly in relation to acts of aggression and preparations for such acts.
In this regard the Conference should take into account matters bearing upon the security of the Powers represented and the steps taken toward disarmament.
The recommendations of the Conference shall be submitted to the Powers for their adoption, and shall also be transmitted to the Permanent Court of International Justice.
The said Conference should publish periodical reports concerning the actual conditions of the armaments of the Powers.
The said Conference should advise the Powers concerning measures to be taken to ensure the carrying out of the principles of the present Resolution and it may prepare draft treaties for the establishment of demilitarised zones and for the further promotion of disarmament and peace.
5. The said Conference should appoint a Permanent Technical Committee.
6. The said Conference or its Permanent Technical Committee should give advice on technical questions to the Permanent Court of International Justice at the request of said Court.
7. The expenses of the said Conference and of its agencies should be borne by the Powers in the proportion of their respective budgets for defense.
1. Considering that by the terms of Article 8 of the Covenant of the League of Nations
"The Members of the League undertake to interchange full and frank information as to the scale of their armaments, their military, naval and air programmes and the condition of such of their industries as are adaptable to warlike purposes,"
the Assembly, in order to facilitate the carrying out of the said engagement, requests the Council to set up a Commission charged with the duty of making the necessary official examinations and reports.
2. The said Commission shall proceed under such regulations as the Council and the Assembly shall from time to time approve.
3. Subject to such regulations the members of the Commission shall be entitled, when they deem it desirable, to proceed to any point within the territory of any Member of the League or to send sub-commissions or to authorize one or more of their members so to proceed on behalf of the Commission.
4. The Members of the League will give all necessary facilities to the said Commission in the performance of its duties.
5. All reports made by the said Commission shall be communicated to the Members of the League.