Text: English     International Military Tribunal "Blue Series," Vol. 3, p. 176
		5 Dec. 45 This Convention was signed at The Hague by 44 nations, and it is in effect as to 31 nations, 28 signatories, and 3 adherents. For our purposes it is in force in to the United States, Belgium, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Prance, Germany, Luxembourg, Japan, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, and Russia. By the provisions of Article 91 it replaces the 1899 Convention as between the contracting powers. As Greece and Yugoslavia am ponies to the 1899 Convention and not to the 1907, the 1899 Convention is in effect with regard to them, and that explains the division of countries in Appendix C. Again I only desire that the Tribunal should lock at the first two articles: "1. With a view to obviating as far as possible recourse to force in the relations between states, the contracting powers agree to use their best efforts to insure the pacific settlement of International differences." Then I don't think 1 need trouble to read 2. It is the same article as to mediation, and again, there are a number of machinery provisions. The third treaty is the Hague Convention relative to the opening of hostilities, signed at the same time. It is contained in the exhibit which 1 put in. Again I ask that judicial notice be taken of it. The British Document is TC-3. The German reference is the Reichsgesetzblatt for 1910, Number 2, Sections 82 to 102, and the reference in Appendix C to Charge 3. This Convention applies to Germany, Poland, Norway, Denmark, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Russia. It relates to a procedural step in notifying one's prospective opponent before opening hostilities against him. It appears to have had its immediate origin in the Russo-Japanese war, 1904, when Japan attacked Russia without any previous warning. It will be noted that it does not fix my particular lapse of time between the giving of notice and the commencement of hostilities, but it does seek to maintain an absolutely minimum standard of international decency before the out. break of war. Again, if I might refer the Tribunal to the first article: "The contracting powers recognize that hostilities between them must not commence without a previous and explicit warning in the form of either a declaration of war, giving reasons, or an ultimatum with a conditional declaration of war." Then there am a number again of machinery provisions, with which I shall not trouble the Tribunal. 176
		Text: English     International Military Tribunal "Blue Series," Vol. 3, p. 176     Last modified: January 2, 1999 Copyright © 1998 The Mazal Library and The Holocaust History Project. All rights reserved. Technical/administrative contact: webmaster@holocaust-history.org Find a typo? Let us know.