The effect of the Protocol is unquestionably to consecrate the international _status quo_ with a definite position of legality, not to be disturbed by force.[22] The views of the writers, as opposed to the practice of Great Powers, have been adopted. Article 2 of the Protocol forbids a resort to war[23] as against any {45} other State, a party to the Protocol, "except in case of resistance to acts of aggression."[24] Under Article 8, every Signatory agrees to abstain from any act which might constitute a threat of aggression. Under these provisions and the provisions of the Protocol for the settlement of international disputes, intervention to upset the _status quo_ (or to prevent a state from changing it where it legally may) becomes aggression and is an international crime. [1] Such as discovery, occupation of _terra nullius_, etc. See the Treaty of Spitzbergen, A. J. I. L., Vol. XVIII, p. 109. [2] A. J. I. L., Vol. XI, at p. 626. [3] A.J. I. L, Vol. XI, Supp. 1917, p. 53. [4] Some regions of Asia may be exceptions. [5] See the Franco-Swiss Free Zones, by Louis Schulthess, in Foreign Affairs, Vol. 3, No. 2, p. 331, with map. [6] "Et il faut bien remarquer, que la Guerre ne décide pas la question; la Victoire contraint seulement le vaincu à donner les mains au Traité qui termine le différend. C'est une erreur non moins absurde que funeste, de dire, que la Guerre doit décider les Controverses entre ceux qui, comme les Nations, ne reconnoissent point de Juge." Vattel, Book III, Section 38. [7] In general, this is the theory of Article Ten of the Covenant. [8] See the Genesis of the War, Asquith, pp. 97, 98. [9] Article 15. [10] President Wilson's so-called first draft of the Covenant contained a provision along these lines in Article III. See Woodrow Wilson and World Settlement, Baker, Vol. III, p. 89. [11] The statistics of language, etc., even when accurate, do not always forecast the popular wish. Upper Silesia is an instance of this fact. The statistics, as stated in the note of Clemenceau of June 16, 1919, showed 1,250,000 Poles and 650,000 Germans. The vote was 717,122 for Germany and 483,514 for Poland. [12] The Convention between Germany and Poland relating to the régime of Upper Silesia is a document of some 300 pages. [13] I am greatly indebted to Professor A. A. Young for some of my economic information; but he is in no way responsible for any of my conclusions. [14] Of course this is an over-statement. Germany produces about one-tenth of her consumption of copper. [15] Or a period due to war, such as 1919-1920. [16] See Hall, International Law (Seventh Edition), Chapter VIII, for an illuminating discussion. [17] Such as the right of State A to cede territory to State B, notwithstanding the objection of State C to such a cession. [18] See Moore's Digest, Vol. VI, pp. 2-367.