U.S.A. POLICY

Greymouth Evening Star, 17 September 1928, Page 7

U.S.A. POLICY

OUTLINED BY MR. COOLIDGE ANGLO-FRENCH AGREEMENT (Australian Press Association.) (By Cable—Press Assn.—Copyright.) WASHINGTON, September 15 w Holding to America’s historic policy of aloofness in European affairs, President Coolige feels that whatever part the United States might take in the proposed commissions to study an evacuation of the Allied troops from Germany, and to define the German reparations more clearly, must depend on the form and conditions of any invitation to participate. He believes that these subjects lie outside the general interest of the United States, and are essentially European. President Coolidge is of the opinion that the agreement between France and Great Britain on the limitation of naval craft is a matter of great satisfaction* but he wishes it to be made clear that such an agreement will in no way affect the,.United States naval plans. The President feels that the position of the United States on auxiliary craft is well-known, and he believes accordingly that the FrancoBritish agreement must have been reached with a full knowledge of the United States attitude.

INFERENCES AND GUESSES. NEW YORK, -September 15. The New York “World’s” Washington correspondent states: —President Coolidge regards the Franco-British Agreement, as being tantamount to a treaty, entered into virtually in defiance of the United States’ disarmament policy. It' was strongly* indicated at White House to-day that while President Coolidge was represented as "being pleased that the Great Powers have been able to reach an agreement regarding naval matters, it was added that such agreement does not affect America position. The inferences from these observations are," accordingly, that if the French and British have chosen to arrange naval armament affairs between themselves without consulting the United States, and upon terms that palpably are contrary to American policy, as outlined at Geneva, the United 'States is unable to hope, for any furth’er naval reduction, and the corollary 'follows that the United States would Teel compelled to increase its own naval armaments to meet this threat to American equality on the seas. The dispatch implies that President Coolidge’s vexation presumably caused Mr. ‘Kellogg (United States Secretary) to change his plans, whereby he failed to pay a visit to London. The dispatch adds: “It is intimated that the United States might have to send a note to Britain, asking for a 'further explanation of the naval agreement, but it is more likely that. Britain’s Cabinet may be forced to completely abandon this understanding with France.” The dispatch concludes that the American Big Navy enthusiasts are how rejoicing at the opportunity to picture the Anglo-French Agreement as being a serious menace to the security of the- United States, and to strengthen their demands for a large cruiser construction bill.

A BRITISH PROTEST “LESS SOAP—MORE HONESTY” (Recd Sept. 17. 10.30 a.m.) LONDON, Sept. 16. “Britishers would like to know why America is raising such an outcry about the so-called Anglo-French naval agreement,” says the “Sunday Chronicle.” “While details of such arrangement are not public property, a sustained attack by the American Press, aided by misguided fanatics in Britain, is being aimed at England and France. America’s navy is now greater than Britain’s in numbers, and much superior in naval aircraft. Further,, what of the close naval association between America and Brazil. Why all this pretence of seeking peace and of being alarmed at the AngloFrench pact, when America, herself, is going on with a. hugh naval programme. Against whom or what? America’s role of the only “honest broker” is a little sickening to every other nation, particularly England and' France, which are presumed to be diplomatically intriguing whilst America alone is the fair and honest and pacific party in the world, the facts do not support such Unctions < assurance. What we want from Uncle Sam is a little less soap and more open dealing.”