Submarine Thorny Problem at Naval Conference

Manawatu Times, Volume LV, Issue 7143, 14 February 1930, Page 7

Submarine Thorny Problem at Naval Conference

BRITAIN AND AMERICA FOR TOTAL ABOLITION

France and Japan Desire Retention

United Press Association.—By Electric Telegraph.—Copyright. LONDON, Feb. 11. Nothing that has not. alpeadv been foreshadowed occurred at the Plenary Session on tho thorny subjept of submarines. The Powers ranged them: selves as expected—Britain and America wholeheartedly for France and Japan for retention for defence under strict conformity with international law; Italy more disposed to> abolition than retention, but as Signor Grand! said, maintaining an open mind. The Dominion delegates yery briefly ranged themselves on the British and American side, though nobody knew what was behind Mr To Water’s cryptic phrase about disagreement, some delegates reasoning that the United States’ motion,.rather suggests an eventual outcome in strict reduction in size and numbers and the stricter outlawing of frightfulness. Use of Submarine. M. Leygues (France) considered that the submarine was a warship, like ethers, a defensive weapon wi.ich ail the navel Power cannot abolish. Its use, he said, can and should bo regulated like others. This viewpoint will be kept in mind by France by stating her standpoints, when drawing up proposals to determine the general structure of her Empire. The history of the recent war proved that the submarine was not used against mechant ships only. He quoted the naval losses duo to the submarine in wartime as follows: —France, 82,000 tons; Britain 191,000 tons; Italy, 20,000 tons; a total of Allied tonnage'of 312,000 tons. Submarines not only destroyed warships, but immobilised them.

He explained that Mr MacDonald’s and M. Tardieu’s discussion last night was of a very general nature. The figures submitted were only tentative with. the idea of supplying a basis on which to begin the actual work of quotas. Tho American spokesman said that, though the Experts Committee had prepared a tonnage formula, it was an exaggeration to Bay that they had reached unanimity. They certainly had on. one portion but not on another. He denied that a Japanese proposal to neutralise the Philippines had evor come to tho notice of the American delegation.

Regarding the reproach that the submarine was unchivalrous, the same applied to all new weapons, when the firearm replaced the sword and the torpedo the gun. France had to protect her Empire of millions of square xxiiles and lines of communications to Africa, for which she relied on the submarine. As a scout the submarine was practically matchless. These reasons and the comparative weakness of her surface craft made the submarine indispensable. France’s viewpoint was unaltered since the Washington Conference, when sho accepted an inferior ratio of capital ships. It should be borne in mind that the league of Nations sanctioned submarines to its members. Any vessel might be used criminally in war.

CRYPTIC UTTERANCE. SOUTH AFRICAN DELEGATE. MR. TE WATER EXPLAINS. LONDON, Feb. 12. Around Mr. te Water’s cryptic utterance yesterday the French Press has again woven a story of Empire disunity. The Echo de Paris says: “Mr. Fenton and Mr. Wilford, had they dared, would have ranged themselves behind their outspoken South African colleague/' Mr. te Water, however, was merely suffering from an overdose of tact and caution. The Australian Press Association ascertained that what he tried to convey was that he was unable to see the logic of any one trying to argue that submarines could be any good. Mr. te Water told a Sun correspondent that several requests had been made to him for an explanation of his speech, which seemed to have surprised people. “There is nothing surprising about it,” he said. “Having heard the other speeches, I decided to indicate what in my mind was their effect. I think we would get much further by an objective and not a subjective examination of the problem. The younger nations are anxious for peace. Coming here with a fresh outlook we see the position in a much better perspective than those on the spot. I endeavoured to speak as the representative of one of the younger nations, frankly expressing a fervent desire to abolish warfare." The Australian Press Association learns that the First Committee this afternoon will create a Submarine Committee, with no other hope than of approximating the French and American motions into a restrictive convention.

He revealed that British submarines did comply with international law. Tffie submarine was not necessarily barbarous. France believed that unrestricted submarine war against trade should be outlawed and accepted the principles of the Root Resolutions of Washington. It should be possible to permit them without violating international law. M. Leygues emphasised that neither America, Italy, nor Japan sought abolition at Washington. The attitude of the trio then was very near the present French viewpoint. He concluded that France could not accept abolition, though she was ready to concur in their international regulation. He proposed the appointment of a committee to prepare an agreement, open to signature by all Powers, forbidding submarines to act against merchantmen, otherwise than in strict conformity with the rules at present and in the future observable by surface warships.

What The Others Said. Signor Grandi said that Italy was determined to uphold the cause of disarmament, but must examine the abolition of submarines not as a separate problem but one within the Conference’s framework. He appreciated the viewpoint that it was a weapon of smaller Powers against the capital ships of larger Powers. He would be glad to see the abolition of the latter discussed. , He asked was not a solution possible along the lines of the abolition of both. Italy was ready to renew an undertaking to restrict the use of submarines and armed merchantmen. Mr. Takarabe (Japan), expressing Japan’s objection to abolition, mentioned that aircraft could offer a greater menace to defenceless lives. Japan needed submarines to defend her island kingdom. She was eager to adopt the Root formula bringing thorn into the strict circumscription of law and supported the French _motion. Mr. Fenton (Australia) briefly agreed with the observations made by Mr. Alexander. Mr. Wilford similarly spoke, adding that New Zealand had arrived at the conclusion for the different Teason that unless the submarine was offensive it could not be defensive. Mr. Te Water regretted that he could not wholeheartedly agree to the reasoning of some delegates, but South Africa, if abolition was unattainable, favoured limitation. At Mr. MacDonald’s suggestion the Conference remitted to the First Committee the French motion, also the American urging the creation of a committee to report firstly on the abolition of the submarines; secondly, regulation to uso under the laws governing the use of surface vessels; thirdly, regulations of units and size of submarines. , Criticisms Resented by American Leader

SMALL MERCIES. NEWSPAPER COMMENT. British Official Wireless. RUGBY, Feb. 12. Commenting on yesterday’s submarine discussion, The Times says: * ‘ There is an unanswerable force in' the argument that the only way to humanise the submarine is to abolish it, but even so it will be something gained if definite rules are framed restricting its use. Even to an unscrupulous Power the existence of a definite code embodied in a formal treaty would be a deterrent. Before vielating it, it would find warning in the experience of Germany, remembering, as Mr. Stimson reminded the Conference, that it was the threat of unrestricted submarine warfare which brought the United States into the war.”

The Manchester Guardian says: “If it were proposed to abolish the oceangoing submarine, not because it is a submarine, but because it is an offensive weapon, the suggestion ought not to offend any Power which demands the submarine as a vital defensive weapon. The American delegation has put down the size of the individual submarine for discussion. That is the first point. If it is a defensive weapon let its sizo be reduced to suit its character There is a second point. Are not these swollen submarine forces ranging from the 127 boats of the United States to the 57 of Italy to be heavily reduced ? ” The Daily lelegraph thinks that something will be gained by the declaration of the French, Italian, and Japanese delegates of their desire,to enter into an international undertaking, such as has not hitherto been formally completed, to use submarines against merchant shipping in strict conformity with the rules observed in surface warfare. But with the dismissal of the proposal of abolition gees the prospeet of effecting invaluable economy, and of diminishing by much the danger that lies in all extensive developments of armaments.

Received Thursday, 9.30 p.m. WASHINGTON, Feb. 12. The State Department refuses to answer criticisms . of the American delegation in London while the conference is in session, but the general feeling is "expressed by Mr Cotton, Acting-Secretary of State, who gaid:

/‘This business of shooting at the piano player is an indoor sport which I deplore." He added that he had received no communication frbm Colonel Stimson bearing upon the proposal that the United States would build a new super dreadnought, and refused to comment further. Senator Metcalf proposed that the United States should purchase the Rodney and charge the price against the British debt to America. Blanks in Classification Tables s TO BE FILLED IN LATER. LONDON, Feb. 12. Tho British spokesman confirmed the report that the experts had settled a great deal of the tonnage difficulties, but had left others to be overcome by the First Committee or the heads of delegations. Hia admission that they had drawn up a table and left blanks for the figures strengthened the view that the chief agreement relates to classifications.