FOREIGN POLICY

Southland Times, Issue 20641, 13 November 1928, Page 5

FOREIGN POLICY

THE UNITED STATES

SPEECH BY PRESIDENT COOLIDGE RELATIONS WITH EUROPE (United Frees Assn.—By Telegraph—Copyright.) Washington, November 11. President Coolidge, in an Armistice Day address here, made an important announcement on foreign policy. The President recounted American achievements of arms in war, and said: “The United States was the only country after the conflict that had much reserve power left. Our resources delivered Europe from starvation and ruin.” He denied that the United States made a profit out of the war. The United States expenditures on the conflict would probably total 100,000,000,000 dollars, or half the entire wealth of the country when it entered the war. America’s benefits from the war were not material, but spiritual. “People are awake to the drumbeat of the new destiny. Every dictate of humanity constantly cries aloud that we do not want any more war. Eternally the questions before the League of Nations are how to prevent war and how to defend ourselves if it comes. We do not know any nation which has ever been able to provide arms enough always to be at peace. It is our duty to ourselves and the cause of civilization, to the preservation of domestic tranquility, to our orderly lawful relations with foreign people, to maintain an adequate army and navy. We do not need a large land force. The situation is different when we turn to the sea.” • Large Ships Necessary. The President recounted the long coastline and foreign commerce, “unsurpassed in importance,” and foreign investments to protect, and added: “But we are also bound by international treaty to defend the Panama Canal. We require, because we have few fuel stations, ships of large tonnage, and, having scarcely any merchant vessels capable of mounting five or six-inch guns, it is obvious that, based on our needs, we are entitled to a larger number of warships than a nation having these advantages. We called the Washington Conference for the purpose of naval agreement. It no doubt has some significance that foreign Governments made agreements limiting the class of combat vessels in which we were superior, but refused limitation in the class in which they were superior. We made altogether the heaviest sacrifice in scrapping work which was already in existence. That should forever remain, not only a satisfaction to ourselves, but a demonstration to others of our good faith in advocating the principles of limitations.” The President, referring to the conference between Britain, Japan and the United States, said: "The United States there proposed limitation of cruiser tonnage of 250,000 to 300,000. The British, as near as we could see their proposal, asked for from 425,000 to 600,000. No agreement was made as it appeared useless to us to agree to so large a tonnage, which constituted not limitation but extension of war fleets.” Anglo-French Pact. Referring to the rejection of the AngloFrench agreement the President said: “Had we not done so the French Army and English Navy would have been so near to unlimited that the principle of limitations would be virtually abandoned.” Mr Coolidge praised the outlawry of war treaty. “While recognizing to the fullest the duty of self-defence and not undertaking, as no human ingenuity could undertake, absolute guarantee against war, it is the most complete and will be the most effective instrument for peace ever devised. We can only say that this is the best that mortal man can do. It is beside the mark to argue that we should put no faith in it.” Taking up reparations and war debts, Mr Coolidge said: “We have heard an impressive amount of discussion concerning our duty to Europe. We do have such duties but they are mutual.” He declared that American loans to Germany have enabled her to pay reparations, but there is little reason for sending capital abroad while rates for money in London and Paris are four or five per cent., while in the United States they are much higher. England is placing very considerable loans abroad. France has had large credits abroad, some of which have been called home. Both are making very large outlays for military purposes. Europe on the whole has arrived at a state of financial prosperity and stability where it cannot be said we are called on to help or act much beyond a strict business basis. The needs of our own people require that

any further advances by us have most careful consideration. It would not only be selfish, but an entirely unenlightened view for the United States not to wish Europe to prosper. We want the investment of life and money which we made there to be to their benefit. We should like to have our Government debts all settled, though it is probable that we could better afford to lose them than our debtors could afford not to pay them. It has always been plain that Europe and the United States are lacking in mutual understanding. We are prone to think they can do as we can do. We are not interested in their age-old animosities. We have not suffered from centuries of violent hostilities. We do not see how difficult it is for them to displace distrust in each other with faith in each other. They, on the other hand, appear to think that we are going to do exactly what they would do if they had our chance.” Declaring that America is against imperialism, the President said: “America’s outlying possessions, with the exception of Panama Canal, are a hindrance, not an advantage. If we could secure more complete reciprocity in goodwill, final liquidation of balance of our foreign debts and such further limitation of armaments as would be commensurate with the treaty renouncing war, our confidence in the effectiveness of any additional efforts on our part to assist in the further progress of Europe would be greatly increased.”—Australian Press Association.