FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43  
44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   >>   >|  
t not be sincere, but it would discredit the authority of those who attempt to revive the damnable doctrines.[2] The great difficulty, of course, arises as to the means of enforcing the agreement against war, of finding some proper and effective sanction to secure its observance. It may be well to note that throughout this discussion the word sanction is used in the strict legal sense, meaning some definite penalty or punishment to be inflicted on a wrong-doer. It is the existence of such a "sanction" which is the clearest way of enforcing obedience, and gives a rule of conduct the force of law. Two definite proposals are made in Lord Parker's scheme. (1) "If an act of war be committed against any member of the League, the Council is to notify it, and thereupon every member should (_a_) break off diplomatic relations with the nation guilty of such act; (_b_) prohibit and take effective steps to prevent all trade and commerce between itself and the guilty party; (_c_) place an embargo upon all ships and property of the guilty nation found in its territorial waters or within its territories." A very similar suggestion, though not quite so definite, was made by the present writer in an article on "Sanction in International Law," which appeared in the Italian Journal "Scientia" in 1916. "The nations might agree that any belligerent which wilfully violates or invades neutral territory shall be treated as a moral leper. Without actually going to war they should cease to have dealings with the invader, forbid all intercourse of their subjects with the country which violates the neutral territory." For the sake of brevity this may be called the "economic boycott," but it is really very much more than simply economic pressure. It is a common habit in political discussions to confuse very different things, to which the same name is given, and the term "economic boycott" is being used to cover three proposals of very different character. (_a_) It may mean a permanent exclusion of Germany from the markets of the world to punish its people for supporting the crimes of its rulers and incidentally to secure for ourselves a valuable extension of trade by reason of the exclusion of a rival. (_b_) It may mean a temporary measure to insure that agreed terms of peace are observed by those who disregard "mere scraps of paper," to act as a guarantee that restitution shall be made for wrongs done, to check the revival and extension of
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43  
44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

economic

 
guilty
 

sanction

 

definite

 

extension

 

exclusion

 
proposals
 

nation

 

violates

 
member

boycott

 
effective
 

secure

 

enforcing

 
territory
 
neutral
 
called
 

brevity

 

wilfully

 
belligerent

invades

 

treated

 

Journal

 

Scientia

 

nations

 

Without

 

forbid

 
invader
 

intercourse

 

subjects


dealings
 
country
 
character
 

measure

 

temporary

 
insure
 
agreed
 

reason

 

rulers

 

incidentally


valuable

 
observed
 

wrongs

 

revival

 

restitution

 

guarantee

 

disregard

 
scraps
 

crimes

 
supporting