SKY AS LIMIT

Evening Post, Volume CXXV, Issue 37, 14 February 1938, Page 9

SKY AS LIMIT

NAVAL BUILDING •

JAPANESE CHALLENGE

FEELING IN AMERICA

(United Press" Association—By Electric Telegraph—Copyright.) WASHINGTON, February 12. Japan's refusal to disclose her naval intentions or to discuss limitation agreements'on a basis acceptable to America is interpreted officially as a direct challenge to a "blue sky" naval building race.

The Washington correspondent of the "New York Times" states that the reaction in Administration circles to the tone and comment of the Japanese Note indicates that only the refusal of Congress to vote funds would prevent the construction by the United States of the greatest navy the world has seen. . . ■ . ,

It is expected that the State Department will' consult the British and French Governments early next week with a view to mutual absolution from the qualitative limitations of the London Naval Treaty.

The only comment, by the Secretary of State (Mr. Cordell Hull) "This Government seeks constantly to cooperate in advancing the policy of limitation and reduction of armaments, and regrets any development having the effect of encouraging rather than discouraging races in armament building." ENCOURAGEMENT FOR LAWLESSNESS. . However, it is most significant that Mr. Hull made public almost simultaneously a letter to Mr. L. L. Ludlow, a member of Congress, summing up the foreign policy and again emphasising that no plan existed for naval cooperation with any nation, though the United States was following a policy of parallel action and exchange of information with other nations, with whom she had common interests and objectives in world affairs.

While Mr. Hull's letter is addressed, to Representative Ludlow, officials consider it is in response to numerous questions raised in Congress during the naval debate. In this sense its implications are very far-reaching.

Mr. Hull said it was a matter of simple common sense. If every peaceful nation insisted on remaining entirely aloof from eyery other peaceful nation to pursue armament limitation without reference to the armaments of other nations, the inevitable outcome would be that nations inclined to play lawless roles would thereby be given great encouragement or even assistance towards doing so.

"While in our foreign policy there is no disposition or intent to engage in warfare, we believe that the people of this country desire that our nation's interests abroad be. given fair treatment, and that there should prevail in the world conditions of peace,

order, and security," he said. "This country has always exerted its influence in support of such objectives. If it is prepared and known to be prepared the likelihood of its being drawn into trouble will either be absent or greatly diminished. EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION. "To be more specific, this Government carefully avoids on the one hand extreme internationalism, with political entanglements, and, on <the other, extreme isolation, with, its tendency to cause other nations to believe that we are more or less afraid. While avoiding alliances and entangling commitments,' it is appropriate and advisable, when this, and other countries.■ have common interests and objectives, for this Government to exchange information wilh the Governments of such 'other countries, confer with those Governments, and, where practicable, proceed on parallel lines, but reserving always thefullest freedom of judgment and right of independence' of action." ' » ■ ; ■ ■ i The most discouraging aspect of the reply, according to experts, is the use' of language practically identical with that" employed by.'the Japanese delegation to the London Conference. Thus the problem is back where'it was two years dgo.

This country and Britain might be prepared to agree in principle to a common upper limit if they were assured that it did not mean in practice that the Japanese would build new battleships feverishly while the two others built nothing. Assurances from Japan.could riot be.'secured in London in 1936, ■and have riot been secured to this day. At the existing ratio experts on both sides concede that Japan could never successfully attack the United States nor the. United States Japani .

The United Press • says . that Mr. Hull's statement and the attitude; of officials indicates that the Government will probably not continue conversations with Japan, and also indicates a conviction that conversations would lead nowhere while Japan maintains that she must /be guaranteed naval parity or build without restriction to suit her own needs. With1 the Administration in the frame of mind induced by the Note, the proposal of Senator W. H; King to convoke a general arms limitation' conference meets' with'little attention:

ARMS LIMITATION CONFERENCE ' PROPOSAL. ( Senator Kin? says he proposes to introduce a resolution asking the President toinvite all the nations concerned to come to Washington to see if an arms limitation cannot be reached. "I want to see every nation put its cards on the table in an effort to dispel the atmosphere of fear and end 'the terrible burden of armaments," he said. "I would like to see the democratic nations of the world join in an understanding to maintain peace. They should work together. We are not and cannot be isolationists. The United States ought to set an example in' working the world towards peace."

The Washington correspondent of the "New York Times" adds that whether or not the Senate adopts Senator King's resolution on Monday, there seems little likelihood that President Roosevelt1" will proceed with alacrity to carry it out.

The indications are motions for consultation with' England and France, to be carried out largely .for the purpose of preserving the of a solid front in face of the* Japanese attitude. The United States does not want to be put in the position of appearing1 to wage a purely bilateral naval building competition with Japan. It wants the matter presented as a common problem in which other naval Powers are concerned. : INVOCATION OF ESCALATOR ' '■■■■. CLAUSE. The first step is to see whether London and Paris consider, as Washington undoubtedly does, that the situation justifies the invocation of the escalator clause. Whether or not England, and France agree, there is no doubt that the United States will consider it must escalate. It will proceed to do so after consultation, regardless of the result of the consultation. ■.'■..

The Washington correspondent of the New York "Herald-Tribune" says President Roosevelt said he was working on a peace move to reassure the country that his aims are peaceful, and that he is not pursuing a course calculated to entangle the country in war. It is conjectured in some quarters that the President is considering something more positive than a statement in a radio address, although none are aware how he proposes to attain his objective. *

Curiosity is aroused over a special task which the President is reported to intend for Mr. Berle, the recently-ap-pointed assistant to Mr. Cordell Hull, whose duties are not yet defined.