The Geneva Protocol — John Stuart Mill — John Shaqi
The Geneva Protocol
John Stuart Mill · en
57. It transpired that the Japanese Delegation, if they failed to
secure acceptance of this amendment to article 5, intended to press for
the exclusion from article 10 of the sentence at the end of paragraph 2
(1), which included in the definition of an "aggressor" a State which
resorted to war and disregarded a unanimous report of the Council or a
judicial sentence or an arbitral award recognising that the dispute
arose out of a matter within the domestic jurisdiction of the other
State concerned. They pointed out that it was unjust that in such
cases the League, while refusing pacific means of settlement to an
injured State, should denounce that State as an aggressor if it took
steps to defend its legitimate interests by force.
58. The possible effect of this alternative amendment was regarded by
many Delegations with great concern. It would have suggested the
legitimacy of a resort to war in connection with a dispute arising out
of some domestic matter as to which the Council could give no help and
make no recommendation for its solution.
59. In these circumstances the British Empire Delegation was agreed
that the best course was to endeavour to find a solution by enlarging
article 19 of the Protocol, so as to make it clear that the existing
power of the Council, under article 11 of the Covenant, of endeavouring
to achieve a pacific settlement in any case where the peace of the
world was endangered, was not prejudiced by the provisions of the
Protocol. Though the discussions of the matter remained very friendly
in tone this proposal did not prove acceptable to the Japanese
Delegation. Accordingly, when the amendment came before the plenary
meeting of the First Committee on the 28th September, the Japanese
Delegation withdrew their amendment to article 5 and proposed the
amendment to article 10. At the suggestion of the French Delegate the
question was referred back to the sub-committee.
{243}
60. Late on the 29th September the basis of solution was found. It was
immediately submitted to the representatives of the Dominions and
India, and was fully considered by them at two further meetings on the
following day. After slight modifications the text of two amendments
proved acceptable to the British Empire Delegation, and after being
accepted by the Japanese and French Delegations, these amendments were
adopted by the First Committee. They involved the addition to the last
sentence of article 5 of the words "this decision shall not prevent
consideration of the situation by the Council or the Assembly under
article 11 of the Covenant," and the addition at the end of paragraph 2
(1) of article 10 of the words "nevertheless in the last case the State
shall only be presumed to be an aggressor if it has not previously
submitted the question to the Council or the Assembly in accordance
with article 11 of the Covenant."