The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News, The Echo and The Sun. WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 31, 1934. JAPAN AND NAVAL PARITY.

Auckland Star, Volume LXV, Issue 26, 31 January 1934, Page 6

The Auckland Star: WITH WHICH ARE INCORPORATED The Evening News, Morning News, The Echo and The Sun.

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 31, 1934. JAPAN AND NAVAL PARITY.

Tor the cause that lacks assistance. For the wrong that needs For the future in the distance. And the good that ice can do

A definite announcement has been made by the Japanese Minister of the Navy that Japan intends to serve notice on the Powers within a year demanding a change in the ratios fixed by the Washington and London treaties, and he has intimated that parity is considered necessary for purposes of defence. These ratios have never been considered as wholly satisfactory by the Japanese. At Washington they demanded a ratio of 10—10—7 for capital ships, and consented to the inferior ratio only on condition America abandoned the project of fortifying Guam and the Philippines. At both the Washington and the London Conferences the Japanese urged that their navy was purely for defensive functions, and that it was needed to protect the routes of her supplies of foodstuffs and of the essential raw materials of industry, for which Japan is largely dependent on other countries. This dependence is undeniable, but when the Minister of the Navy insists that parity in all respects with Britain and the United States is necessary for defence, one may ask, defence against whom? From Europe Japan is separated by 10,000 miles of water; between her and America lies the Pacific, almost 5000 miles wide. On the Asian continent, across the Japan and Yellow Seas, there is at present no nation capable of challenging Japan. The demand for parity is probably largely a matter of prestige. Under the Japanese system of Government the Minister of the Army is always a general, and the Minister of the Navy an admiral, both in active service. They are not responsible to the Prime Minister, or even to the Cabinet —they ' are responsible directly to the Emperor. They naturally seek to magnify their office and the two institutions they control. It is doubtful if parity will be conceded by either Britain or the United States. Indeed, it is doubtful if parity would be demanded by Japan if the decision lay entirely with the civilian power. The national finances are hardly in a position to stand any great increase in armaments. The Cabinet still has the power of the purse, and this power may yet be used to curb the ambitions of the navalist school.