NAVAL PARITY SLOGAN.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20482, 6 February 1930, Page 8

NAVAL PARITY SLOGAN.

BRITAIN AND AMERICA.

UNITED STATES VIEWPOINTS.

ARGUMENTS AND REPLIES,

zrr THE £T. HON. WINSTON CHUBCHIIIi. (Copyright.) No. I.

Naval parity has become a slogan in Washington. A navy " second to none," say Americans. "We are rich enough to buy one. As for making it, one of our steel companies alone makes as mucli steel as all Britain put together." " A navy * second to none.' Can wo do with less when wo are tho greatest, the strongest, tho safest, and of course, the richest nation in the world? Why shouldn't we have as large a navy as Old England ? ' Rule Britannia ' and ' Rule Columbia.' Let us hopo they will always rule the same way. " And please observe that, but for our quaker stock, our deep love of peace, our high ideals, our desire to set an example to all nations and lead the world in to paths of peace, our loathing of war and violence and all tho vainglorious swashbuckling of an ancient, obsolete, tyrant-ridden Europe—but for that we would build a navy larger than .any other navy, or larger than the next two navies put together! Please admire us for our pacifism, for our self-restraint, for our generosity."

Thus Washington. But a quieter mood reigns over the face of the Continent. " Of course, we must back up our Government against foreign countries with their artful diplomacy. But we have a lot of other very important things to do —developing this continent, for example. Making better homes for all our people. You are quite right iu saying we have no dangers. We are not afraid of anyone. We have the oceans on either side of us. We have no quarrel with anyone. No one is going to invade us. No one is going to cut off our food supply. In fact, we have got the food supply—in a largo measure, we are the food supply ourselves.

The " Equal Navy " Plea. "We understand your difficulties. In a crowded island with your food and trade all coming across the seas, your hold on 'the East depending upon the English Channel, the Bay of Biscay, the Mediterranean, the Suez Canal, the Red Sea, the Indian Ocean, and Singapore, and so on. We quite understand you feel differently about it. We do not wish to injure you. On the contrary, we want to be friends, not ordinary diplomatic friends, but real friends, and work together for peace and disarmament. Why should we not have equal navies, anyway —and good strong ones, too. Then we can all,jog along together, and have war nnd militarism banished for ever."

To this the Englishman makes rather a complicated reply. " First," he says, " we have agreed to equal battle fleets, and we accept the principle of ' equal powers upon the sea.' But we do not wish to be tied down about the cruisers and small craft, because this is the apparatus by Which we bring in our daily bread, because we have many dangers in Europe and Asia from which you are free. " We dp not wish to put ourselves in a position where we can be starved out quite easily or have our trade and means

of livelihood completely destroyed. Therefore, we are reluctant to bind ourselves l)y a treaty which will afterwards grow into a Monroe doctrine not to have any more cruisers : or small craft than you require for quite different purposes. We do not think a treaty of parity counted crudely by numbers or tonnage fulfils the principle of ' equal powers upon the sea.'

Difference in Conditions. " To arrive at a treaty of parity many other things, among them the extreme difference in the conditions under which we live, ought to be counted. Numerical parity means permanent British inferiority. . It meians that we have to go through life with a noose around our neck, and even the fact that the noose is in the hands of our best friend does not entirely _ remove our objections. At any rate, we do not see why we should sign a treaty declaring that such a state of things is right, or fair, or equal. " Secondly," the Englishman says, " if you feel strongly about your navy, and that it must be equal to any other in the world, why don't you build it, and feel comfortable and proud ? We should not add a ship to our ordinary programmes of. fleet replacement because you build 10 or 15 more cruisers. Why don't you build it? You will feel much better when you have got it done. We shall be just as good friends. We shall not worry about

it at all; but why do you want us to sign a treaty saying that it's ' parity ' and ' world disarmament' when we know it isn't anything like that? Exercise your rights, use your power, get on with your job; but do not ask us to sign a solemn declaration that black is white or

odds even." Tho Washington Viewpoint. Alt tho goodwill in (he world will not make this Second argument agreeable to American ears. In Washington particularly it is unwelcome. "We do not want to build a large navy. Our people would not like it. They have better things to 'lo with gold and steel. Wo do not want to arm ourselves up to the level of other powers. We want to persuade other powers to disarm down to ours, and we do not mind how low that level is put—the lower tho better."

To which we must reply: "How can you reduce our (lungers and anxieties fo .! lower level ? How ran you relievo us from the absolute conditions of our existence as a .corporate Empire and, indeed, hs living people? Would vou not he wry it your insistence led 'to a breaknow n in ILuropo of thn elements awl forres you value (he mo'i, or led to ;in explosion in Asia ? " do bo Concluded.)