BRITAIN'S ANSWER.

Auckland Star, Volume LIX, Issue 255, 27 October 1928, Page 9

BRITAIN'S ANSWER.

ARMS LIMITATION. Cushendun Replies To The Critics. HALF LOAF BETTEB THAN NONE (British Offlctal Wireless.) (Received 1.80 p.m.) RUGBY, October 28. Criticisms of the Anglo-French naval compromise proposals were replied to oy Lord Cushendun, the Acting Foreign Secretary, in a speech at Blackpool last night. He characterised the line taken by critics as foolishly inept both in regard to the method whereby these efforts were made to overcome the deadlock on the Preparatory Commission for Disarmament Conference and the alleged secrecy with which the negotiations were undertaken. If agreement was to be reached he said there was only one way of setting about it, namely, that of endeavouring by friendly conversations to advocate a compromise between the opposing English and French views which constituted one of the most formidable difficulties in the way of naval limitations. "These negotiations were successful in arranging a compromise, but it did not cover the other naval Powers, without whose concurrence the compromise would be useless as a step to general agreement at Geneva. Accordingly we at once informed the American, Italian and Japanese Governments and asked for their views. "Although the announcement that agreement had been readied was made without delay, it is true we did not immediately publish the correspondence between the French Government and ourselves in which were the actual terms of the compromise. This was because international courtesy required that we should wait until we had received the replies we had asked for. "That is the sole ground on which we were accused of secret diplomacy and a flimsier was never made. There was no concealment from beginning to end." It was the aim of the British policy to be 'on equally good terms with all countries and friendly relations with the nearest neighbour remained the essential factor in the British policy. He confessed that the outlook for international disarmament was not at present promising. Britain would not relax her efforts, but it was not easy to see what she could do if, whenever she came to agreement with any Power on this question, she was to be denounced as a furtive conspirator and a hopeless blunderer for not having achieved more. Britain proposed the total limitation of submarines, but all they could get was a limitation of larger submarines,] and as they believed half a loaf was better than no bread, they accepted it. i They were anxious to limit military reserves, bnt they were in a small minority. At the League of Nations Committee on that point they could, by sticking out for their own opinions, have prevented anything at all being done. It was not the policy of the Government to obstruct disarmament because they could not get their way in everything. When they could not get all they wanted they took what they could get. That was the full basis of their action in the Anglo-French compromise.