Singapore Base

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XIV, Issue 90, 24 March 1924, Page 5

Singapore Base

Suspension Endorsed

ARTICLE BY MR. GARVIN.

I,EVER LN DISARMAMENT NEGOTIATIONS.

(By Cable.—Preai Association.—Copyright.'

(Received 24, 40.0 a.m.) London, March 23. In an article endorsing the Government’s Singapore decision, Mr. J. L. Garvin, in the “Observer,” says ho hopes Australia and New will realise that the project is not absolutely abandoned but postponed in order to strengthen the Prime Minister’s efforts to bring about a definite degree of general disarmament, but if no reciprocity is secured the strengthening of Singapore is unax'oidable. He stresses that Japanese development is still in the military expansionist . phase, while Singapore is strategically the throttle valve of the whole English-speaking world, the capture of which by Japan would make impossible effective Anglo-American cooperation in the Far East in the event of conflict between Japan) and the white races which all sane men profoundly pray will never arise, and Japan would have an excellent chance oi establishing sovereignty over China and all the East Indies. Tlie “Spectator” fears that before Singapore could be completed aerial development would have rendered the defence of such bases most difficult. It is even conceivable that large cities in Australia could be more easily protected from the air than from the sea. Furthermore, the “Spectator” doubts whether Singapore would give the Empire the key to the Pacific.— (Reuter).

THE CONTRARY VIEW.

FLOUTING THE DOMINIONS.

(Received 24. 9,45 a.mA London, March 23. Colonel Amery, in the “Sunday Times,” emphasises that the abandonment of the Singapore base is not only nouting the dominions but causing a belief that the resolutions of the Imperial Conference are nothing compared with the claims of party politics. It is notice to the dominions that w© are prepared to leave their protection to chance or even abandon them. What will the dominions feel if Britain disposes. of questions affecting their security with pacifist generalities? Eventually the Navy must be sustained by Imperial co-operation between Britain and the dominions in building up navies capable of. combining in a single fleet and rendering mutual help. If we refuse such an arrangement as the abandonment of Singapore suggests we will destroy the whole basis of naval co-operation leading to disaster for all.—(“Sydney Sun” cable).

SIR JAN HAMILTON’S VIEWS.

A LAND QUESTION

London, March 22. Sir lan Hamilton, speaking at Reading, emphasised that Singapore was essentially a land question. He said it might help to calm the public mind, especially in Australia and New Zealand, if he reminded them that he was sent in November. 1912, as InspectorGeneral of the Overseas Forces, with a full staff, in order to help the Governments to make up their minds regarding the Singapore docks. In his reports he predicted that the very day the tension in Europe relaxed so the great Powers would turn their attenlion to the Pacific, and that Singapore would become the key to the position and should therefore be strengthened immediately, even if it meant withdrawing troops from China and raising a force of Malay militia. The garrison at that time was not strong enough to held Singapore. Two events changed the political j actors, he continued. The first was the termination of the Japanese Alliance and. secondly, the Japanese earthquake. The question remained largely a land question. Japan could not embark upon a military expedition to the Antipodes unless she got hold oi a dock lor modern battleships at Trincomalee. The United States could npt move her battle fleet into the i eiiow Sea unless she held a dock at Singapore. Why offer so terrible a temptation to the general staffs of any nation as docks lox- modern battleships at Singapore without a big land force to protect them? Why, anyway, do it when Japan might think quite erroneously that she is being squeezed because she happened to have suffered from the earthquake?—(A. and