The popular, and one may say naive, idea is that peace can be secured by disarmament and that disarmament must therefore precede the attainment of absolute security and lasting peace.

I am convinced that when the history of international law comes to be written centuries hence, it will be divided into two periods: the first being from the earliest times to the end of the nineteenth century, and the second beginning with the Hague Conference.

In life, particularly in public life, psychology is more powerful than logic.

Time and time again we have experienced efforts directed toward this popular and simple concept of securing peace by means of disarmament.

Disarmament or limitation of armaments, which depends on the progress made on security, also contributes to the maintenance of peace.

Every success in limiting armaments is a sign that the will to achieve mutual understanding exists, and every such success thus supports the fight for international law and order.

When distrust exists between governments, when there is a danger of war, they will not be willing to disarm even when logic indicates that disarmament would not affect military security at all.