FRENCH DEMANDS

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LV, Issue 17185, 15 February 1930, Page 5

FRENCH DEMANDS

NAVAL LIMITATIONS STATEMENT BY PREMIER NEW VESSELS REQUIRED (Eloc. Tel. Copyright—United Uriels Assn.) (Received February 15. 10 a.m. ) LONDON, Feb. 14. There was a big attendance of journalists at. M. Tardieu\s first press conference, at St-. Janies’ Palace this afternoon. Tho French Premier caused amusement by having a special chair brought in, whereas Mr. .MacDonald usually sits at the end of a desk or leans against a wall.

M. Tardieu read his statement in rapid French, and then a :ded in French : “No questions asked, no questions answered!” and disappeared into tho next room, almost uetore the journalists realised that he had gone. They had many questions, iut were left to make their own interpretations. The statement, which is regarded as one of the most interesting ihus far, is certainly describable as tho most ambitious. While France proposes to scrap several old ships, a considerable) building programme is outlined which includes 240,000 tqus between 1930 and 1936. A significant paragraph thereaiicnt was that France was obliged, owing to tho recent new type of battleship, to build 70,000 tons of capital ships before 1936. It is understood that this is because of ■ Germany’s new Ersatz Preiissen type. It is revealed that France, while at present having 550,000 tons less capital ships than in 1914, has not reduced her cruisers or destroyers, and has increased her aircraft carriers by 32,000 tons, and submarines by 62,000 tons. Furthermore, even if an agreement is reached on the basis of the Anglo-American communiques, Franco’s navy in 1936, totalling 724,000 tons, would, on her own formula, include, the formidable figures of 99,C00 tons of submarines, and 258,0C0 tons of small cruisers and destroyers. PARITY WITH ITALY? Another interesting point is that France, according to her own table, seeks 631,000 tons in 1930 against. Italy’s 361,000 tons, whereas Italy made it clear that she came to the conference seeking parity with France. Italy is now the only Power which has not submitted a statement, and it is eagerly awaited. The statement was as follows: “France, while sharing the English and American desire for agreement, con skiers it necessary to specify her position thus: France, compared with before the war, has considerably reduced her navy. Whereas in 1914 she had in service, plus laid down, 1139 vessels, she now has in service, building, or authorised, 631. France’s naval budget alone among the Powers is below tho pre-war amount. Franco, like Britain, without awaiting the result of the conference, had considerably cut down her building. It should be pointed out also that France alone had not built anything between 1914 and 1920, the dockyards being then occupied in making ammunitions for the Allies.

“If, as is proposed in the, AngloAmerican communiques, the conference delegates were to take as the ground of the agreement the establishment of building programmes between 11130 and 1936, Franco would accept this, with the double reservation that all conference delegates accept, and that the French Parliament ratifies the agreement. The French fleet tonnage in 1936 would thus be: Capital ships under the Washington Treaty, 156; not under the Washington Treaty 52; cruisers of 10,000 tons, 100: old cruisers with Sin. armaments, 24; small cruisers and destroyers, 258; aircraft carriers, 32; submarines 99; total, 724. The size ot the two capital ships would be between 20.000 and 25,000 tons.” . “STRICTLY DEFENSIVE” The statement proceeds: “France lias not used the Washington Treaty rights to the extent of tiio replacement of 70.000 tons, and is now obliged, owing to the recent new type of battleship, to use a part or the whole of this tonnage, if the other new types are built. Accordingly, if there is a battleship naval holiday fill 1936, France) will accept the holiday to the extent o! 105,000 tons, and desires to reinsist that any London naval decision must bo related to limitation on land and air armaments.

“France, like England and America, is profoundly convinced that war between franco and either Britain or America is equally a,s unthinkable as between England and America. Her programme, like theirs, is strictly defensive in conformity with the agreements to which she is a party, particularly the Kellogg Pact, Thus France is not alarmed if England and America either reduce or increase their armaments in order to reach the desired agreement.” The following is a comparison of the 1914-1930 naval tonnages, built, building, or authorised :

GERMAN LIMITATION

PROGRAMME CURTAILED BERLIN', Feb. 14. The German Cabinet has decided not. to seek appropriation for a second “pocket" battleship.

1914 1930 Britain ... 2.476,000 1.296,000 United State s ... 964,000 1,349,000 Japan 646,000 853,000 Italy ... ' 686,000 360.000 France ... 1.139,000 £81,000