A JIGSAW PUZZLE

Evening Post, Issue 20, 23 July 1935, Page 9

A JIGSAW PUZZLE

NAVAL RATIOS PROBLEM MAKING THE PIECES FIT NECESSITY FOR AGREEMENT STRESSED BY FIRST LORD (British Official WlreleES.) (Received July 23, 11.30 a.m.) - RUGBY, July 22. In the course of the debate on the Admiralty Vote in the House of Commons, Opposition speakers criticised the recent Anglo-German naval agreement as not contributing to disarmament, failing to provide for limitation of tonnage, and assuring German supremacy in the Baltic. Mr. George Hall (Labour) feared a fresh impetus to naval building, and observed that among the nations affected by the Washington and London Naval Treaties 700 ships would be due for replacement between 1936 and 1942, and it was estimated that the total cost of replacement was £800,000,000. ■ SUBMARINES QUESTION. Mr. Lloyd George (Lib.) expressed surprise at the concession to Germany of a larger number of submarines. Referring to his controversy with the First Lord of the Admiralty (Sir Bolton Eyres-Monsell) on July 2 and- 3, in the course of which he declared that whereas Germany during the recent Anglo-German' naval conversations had offered to abolish submarines Britain had not been prepared to accept the offer, Mr. Lloyd George quoted reports in the newspapers, and asked why the First Lord had ,not contradicted the statement if it was incorrect. Did the Germans, either in the course of the preliminary talks or at the conference, intimate to the Admiralty that they were prepared to co-operate in the abolition of submarines. Sir Bolton Eyres-Monsell: Certainly. I said so. Mr. Lloyd George: Did we turn it down on the ground that France and others would not accept? The First Lord: That is absolutely untrue. They said they would cooperate. We have decided to put the proposal forward when we get to a general conference at which something can be done. Mr. Lloyd George: After you have given Germany more submarines? . The First Lord: We have a better chance because Germany is with us. SUBSTITUTE NECESSARY. Sir Bolton Eyres-Monsell said that after December, 1936, all existing naval agreements would come to an end, and unless they could put something in their place all navies in the future would be entirely unrestricted.- The Treaty of Washington had conferred enormous benefits on all maritime Powers. It had cut down expenditure and saved the taxpayers of every nation. It had maintained peace for the last fifteen ■ years because the ratios adopted provided a standard of strength appropriate to defensive needs, and at the same time giving no country such a predominance as would make it safe to risk aggression. "•■ It was unfortunately necessary, he said, to abandon the principle of ratios in efforts to secure new agreements because some countries felt it was wounding to their national pride. Instead they had to have a system of programmes. They would not ask naval Powers what their ultimate strength was going to be, but what size of navy they proposed to have in, say, 1942. Then if they could by agreement accommodate those various naval strengths so as to provide adequate defence, yet making it exceedingly unlikely for any country to attack with any chance of ultimate success, they would have achieved something of enormous advantage to the taxpayers of the world and would have contributed very greatly to the 'general pacification. OPPORTUNITY SEIZED. Coining to the question of the agreement with Germany, the First Lord compared the task of trying to secure international agreement with the putting together of a jigsaw puzzle in which the pieces were continually altering in shape, size, and colour. Until recently it had proved almost impossible to get any two pieces together. For this reason the Admiralty welcomed the proposal of a great country like Germany to fix their ratio for ever at a point in relation to our own which we could view without undue anxiety. The general agreement which they had hoped to arrive at would not have been any good at all unless Germany had been in it. He claimed that the Government did benefit not to Britain alone, but to the world, when it closed with the German offer. With the object of obtaining agreement on building programmes they had been having bilateral confidential conversations with a good many countries. The conversations were not conferences at which they could settle anything, but were to pave the way to a conference which they hoped' might be held at the end of this year. , MUST FACE REALITIES. ' "The House must realise," he said, "that we must face up to realities, especially when one is dealing' with dictators." Mr. Winston Churchill (Con.) said he regretted that Britain condoned a flagrant breach of the Versailles Treaty. The mobility of the fleet was greater after the war than before the war. When faced with a German danger, that mobility would pass, and the whole argument for a base at Singapore to protect our interests in the Indian Ocean and maintain the connection with Australia would be affected. We would be unable when the German fleet was built to move any large portion of the British Fleet far from home.