upon before the Conference in most cases remained un-
agreed. Yet it would be well to remember that international
conferences do not gather in order lo demonstrate diver-
gencies, but in order to find ways and means of harmoniz-
ing the opinions of the various parties and to work out
joint decisions. On the other hand, the minority exerted
every effort to explain its views and to appeal for normal
cooperation, and this, as we hope, should not remain fruit-
less of effect.
All this places a big responsibility on She Council of
Foreign Ministers for Ihe ultimate decisions on which the
signing of the treaties will depend.
II
REASONS FOR UNSATISFACTORY RESULTS
From what has been said it will be clear what is the
main reason for the unsatisfactory results of the Confer-
ence's work in regard to a considerable number of questions.
Fsrom first to last, we observed a striving on the part of a
definite group of delegations to secure a dominant position
and to dictate their decisions, without any regard for the
opinion of a large section of the delegations. This was done
in various ways, and at times thisi method -created a rather
difficult situation for the delegations of small countries. One
might have expected that agreement at this Conference
would be facilitated by the initiative of the small states. But
was this actually the case? Actually, the delegations of the
small states were not infrequently compelled simply to fol-
low the dominant trend, the majority.
Take the question of the Danube, or, in other words,
whether or not a decision should be written into the peace
treaties with the Balkan countries to convoke a conference
224