THE PEACE SETTLEMENT
     WHICH IS THE MOST PRACTICAL: A CO-OPERATIVE
             OR AN ENFORCED PEACE SETTLEMENT?
 
THE TWO POINTS OF VIEW.
 
 
1. There is a large school of thought in France
 
and a smaller but influential body of opinion in England 
 
which maintains that the only method of ensuring peace in 
 
Europe is for the victorious Allies to undertake to see
 
that Germany shall be permanently deprived of all power
 
for aggression.
 
     On the other hand the main body of British
 
opinion, and no doubt a considerable element of French 
 
thought, believe that once Germany has been induced or 
 
forced to turn away from aggressive ideas, a co-operative 
 
settlement is necessary based upon equality between the 
 
Allies and Germany.
 
     For the purposes of this paper the exponents of 
 
the super-Versailles form of settlement will be called 
 
Group A and those who favour a co-operative settlement
 
     Group B.
 
     The question to be discussed is not whether the
 
aims of Group B are more ethical, or more morally desirable 
 
than the aims of Group A but which set of aims are the more 
 
practical. The question of practicability must be considered, 
 
not only in regard to the immediate settlement after the 
 
victorious Allies have granted Germany an armistice, 
 
but also in relation to the durability of the settlement 
 
and its effect upon the world.
 
 2 Both Group A and B have many final objectives 
in common. They are agreed that the main purpose of our 
war aims is to save ourselves and Europe from the dominance 
of force; both equally desire to restore the rule of 
international law and the sanctity of freely negotiated
international obligations, both want a restoration of
                                                  Polish