WARSHIPS FOR HIRE

King Country Chronicle, Volume XXXI, Issue 4564, 3 November 1937, Page 2

WARSHIPS FOR HIRE

AMERICAN PLAN. CURIOUS CONSEQUENCES. It was reported by cable last Friday that a contract for leasing six overage warships from the United States to Brazil had been signed, in spite of a protest by Argentina. No doubt the plan for leasing half a dozen over-age destroyers to Brazil seemed a bright idea when it was first thought of. Brazil needs ships, not only for training purposes but to reinforce an inadequate navy, writes Anne O'Hare McCormick in the "New York Times." Should any Power have naval craft to sell, she could not buy them outright without contravening the London Treaty of last year. As to building, the shipyards of the world are so crammed with work that it is said to be impossible to have a vessel of any sort constructed before 1939. The United States Navy has 165 obsolete destroyers. To save the cost of maintaining these expensive obsolescents, eating their heads off in upkeep while the Government is spending vast sums to provide up-to-date ships, and at the same time to do a friendly service to a neighbour — to several neighbours if the demand increased—many have seemed an excellent way of killing two birds with one stone, not to speak of providing samples to prospective customers wooed by other shipbuilders.

But international transactions don't work out as simply as that. The State Department's decision to postpone action in the matter in response to objections from the Argentina Government shows it was unprepared for the buzz of comment, conjecture, and suspicion the plan evoked in South America and European capitals. Therefore it is not surprising that it failed to anticipate the more serious implications and possible consequences of establishing a precendent for Big Navy Powers to rent cruisers to their friends with small navies. A Strange Departure.. This lack of foresight is stranger than the strange plan itself. Consider what the idea implies. Washington points out in self-defence that the opportunity to lease destroyers is offered to all the South American Republics alike. That suggests that elderly American ships up to the number of 165 might be farmed out among our southern neighbours. We call these vessels reconditioned, but to Brazil, to quote the Foreign Minister, they are "comparatively modern."

Now while this hypothetical American fleet patrolling the coasts of the adjoining continent creates an exaggerated, almost a comic, picture, it is easy to see how so substantial a "symbol of solidarity" might be interpreted by the humourless. Granting that the proposed lease is permitted by Article 22 of the naval treaty, and the signatories of that treaty do not object; granted that this country could repossess the destroyers in event of war. What is a War? Now that belligerents omit declaration of hostilities, who determines when a war is a war? And what happens in a case of civil war, much more likely in South America than external attack? Would Americanowned ships be used by the Government in power against its own people? It is no secret that a revolutionary party of considerable proportions exists in Brazil. By what means would we recapture our property if in an emergency the lessee would not return it?

| There is no need to contemplate the effect of this bright idea applied to Europe. If it is argued that only Great Britain is in a position to follow our example, and that in the Commonwealth she had plenty of uses of her own for the invincibles of yesterday, it may be imagined how the British would like it if Italy and Germany found they could spare a few shop-worn cruisers or submarines to rent out to Bulgaria or Greece to redress the balance in the Mediterranean. Indications that wiser counsels will shelve the plan before it ever goes to Congress deepen the wonder why the farsighted State Department did not perceive these acute angles before instead of after the event.