WAR MEMOIRS OF DAVID LLOYD GEORGE 1917

IMPERIAL WAR CABINET AND CONFERENCE 59
ment, they would only be willing to enforce it as long as
they felt it to be a just one. No territorial settlement could
be permanently just, even if it was so at the outset. By degrees
some Powers would feel it to be unjust, and there would
be a division of Powers into two groups. If the revisionist
group grew strong enough, it would force an alteration,
whether the Conference approved as a whole or not. "When
a combination of Powers commands a preponderance of
force — using the word c force' in its widest sense — and
the necessary means of aggression, there can be no certainty
that an effort on its part to alter the territorial settlement
for its own benefit will be actively resisted by the rest of
the world."
Failing active resistance, would the rest of the world
impose a blockade and economic boycott? Probably not, if
they were in any danger of being overrun in consequence
by powerful neighbours. The economic as much as the
military weapon would be powerless against a strong combination
of Powers. At most, the proposed conference would
be a mitigating influence against hasty aggression. It could
not abolish it.
Further, wars do not always arise out of territorial disputes,
even though they frequently end in territorial changes.
Even the Great War did not so arise, for Austria explicitly
disavowed any territorial ambition when she invaded Serbia.
Even if the Conference could ensure counter-action
against a war of territorial aggression, it could not compel
nations to compromise on issues they felt vital to their national
existence or interests. The only way in which agreement
could be reached in a general conference would be by
an evasion of the issue, or by accepting a majority vote. A
majority vote on the vital issues would not be acceptable
to a Great Power. "Great Britain in particular would be
exposed to special and grave dangers; for a substantial