JAPANESE NAVY

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXV, Issue 22964, 16 February 1938, Page 13

JAPANESE NAVY

AMERICAN POLICY CO-OPERATION OF OTHERS ESSENTIAL FOR SECURITY By Telegraph—Press Association—Copyright (Received February 15, 7.5 p.m.) NEW YORK. Feb. 14 Commenting on Japan's reply to the American Naval Note, the New York Times frankly envisages the need for an understanding between America and other democracies. It says: "The reply necessarily will be considered in the light of our own responsibilities under the existing naval treaty and our own defence

needs. "Mr. Vinson proposes to maintain a Navy, not only large enough to protect our coast-line on both oceans simultaneously, but also to protect the Panama Canal, Alaska and Hawaii and our insular possessions, conimerco and citizens abroad.

"If Ave are to attempt all this b/ our own might, without some understanding with other peace-loving democracies, whose interests are akin to ours, wo shall need a much larger Navy than .any now in sight. To achieve complete security in complete isolation is an expensive business." The newspaper prints a symposium of the comment of 14 leading provincial newspapers, seven of which aro in favour of increasing the Navy and the balance are non-committal or suspicious of the Government's intentions.

The Washington correspondent of the New York Herald Tribune says the Government has rejected the idea of calling an international Arms Limitation Conference. A hint from the Japanese Foreign Office that Japan might be willing to provide information about her naval construction (if requested to do so unofficially, but "that it would not necessarily bo binding, has been ignored. , A Government spokesman pointed out that the official request had been preceded earlier by just such quiet efforts to obtain information which might have kept naval building within limits. Although 'no official statement is forthcoming on the conference proposal, the Government's attitude is clear. President Roosevelt discussed foreign policy with Mr. S. D. Mcßeynolds, Democrat member of the House of Representatives for Tennessee, who said later that the conference suggestion was untimely and preposterous. FOREIGN POLICY WASHINGTON'S CRITICS NEW YORK PAPER'S REPLY (Received February 10, 0.50 p.m.) NEW YORK. Feb. 14 "The American Government ought not to be turned aside from the sound course of co-operation for peace by the criticisms of those who would carry new isolation to fantastic limits," says the New York Times in replying to critics of Mr. Cordell Hull's recent exposition of foreign policy. "There is really no way to satisfy these critics in Congress," says the paper, "except to withdraw all our Ambassadors from the capitals of European democracies on tho theory that if they are permitted to remain they may learn something of interest or value to our Government. "It is hard to believe that the American people, who are realists in other matters, are so short-sighted in the field of foreign policy as to fail to see the advantage of proceeding by the method of parallel action if parallel action will strengthen our own case."

PRESIDENT ATTACKED • WAR IN FAR EAST SENATOR FEARS EMBROILMENT (Received February 15, 8.50 p.m.) WASHINGTON. Feb. 14 The President, Mr. Roosevelt, was accused to-day by Mr. G. P. Nye, Republican member of the Senate for North Dakota, of refusing to invoke the Neutrality Act in respect to the Far East bocauso of pressure from trade interests. Ho said the President's naval rearmament programme was directed against Japan and his whole defensive policy contemplated war in the. Far East. The identical force was at work now as in 1914-16, which marched the United States into a war that was not its business. President Wilson was forced to give way to trade interests who had made loans to foreign Powers. "Wo are as near war to-night," said Mr. Nye, "as in the 30 days before we declared war on Germany."