The Daily News THURSDAY, JUNE 23, 1927. REDUCING NAVAL ARMAMENTS.

Taranaki Daily News, 23 June 1927, Page 8

The Daily News THURSDAY, JUNE 23, 1927. REDUCING NAVAL ARMAMENTS.

The agreement which was arrived at, as the result of the Washington Conference, with regard to the ratio of capital ships as between Britain, America and Japan, was accepted as a fair and equitable arrangement that would materially reduce the huge expenditure on capital ships. The 55 —3 ratio agreed upon placed Britain and the United States on an equality, while the lesser allocation for Japan -was quite reasonable. It was at once recognised that there must inevitably be a further conference relative to the ratio of cruisers, submarines and other units of the world’s navies, and it was not long before the anticipated activity of cruiser building and equipment emphasised that unless a further agreement was arrived at regarding that class of warships the probability was that savings effected by the reduced number of capital ships would be more than counterbalanced by the numerical increase of cruisers, their extended power and armaments. So far as Britain is concerned, she stands in a category vastly different from any other Power in respect to cruisers, by reason of having to defend an Empire the component parts of which are many thousands of miles apart in every portion of the world. Obviously, while the British Government could not very well agree to reduce the number of cruisers below that essential for Empire requirements, it would probably be willing to accept a reduction in the tonnage and armaments, especially if each of the Dominions were counted as a separate nation entitled to have its own quota of cruisers and other 1 auxiliary vessels. The Empire contains numerous and farflung colonies, the protection of

which, and the trade attaching thereto, particularly the safeguarding of the Motherland’s food supplies, must be part of the duty of the Imperial Government at all times. It is not surprising, therefore, to find the First Civil Lord of the Admiralty (Mr. W. C. Bridgeman), who has gained considerable knowledge of colonial affairs, making a pronouncement to the effect that the Empire will present a united front at the Geneva Conference, and that such unity will be preserved through constant communication. It is also satisfactory to be assured that, when accepting the invitation to take part In the conference, the British Government made it clear that all sorts of limitations would be discussed. The United States Government formulated the proposals which that country intends submitting to the conference, but it would be only prudent to assume these are to be taken more as points for discussion than as fixed demands on what that Government will insist, though it is significant that an intimation has been given to the effect that both the diplomatic and naval advisers of the Government of the United States are in agreement with such proposals. Britain has practically laid all her cards on the table, frankly and fully. According to Lord Jellieoe the main features of the British proposals submitted to the conference are based on the need to defend the sea routes, and he considers that the first effort of the delegation should be to reduce the size of the ships in the different classes. Britain advocates reducing the battleships by 5000 tons and the cruisers, except those of 10,000 tons built under the Washington Treaty, to 7500, a compromise which ought to prove acceptable to the other Powers. It is also suggested that, if submarines are not eliminated, they also should be considerably reduced in size and armament. In the opinion of a naval expert the American proposals would have -the effect of maintaining the existing ratios, only in the matter of tonnage, not of numbers of vessels. That would mean the ability of America to add considerably to her cruiser tonnage, while Britain would have to reduce hers, Japan’s remaining unchanged, so that America could scrap many of her old and worn out cruisers and replace them with new and more powerful vessels. Evidently that does not conform to the spirit which should animate a conference, the object of which is to reduce the cost of naval armaments. It seems perfectly clear that America intends to insist upon receiving an equal ratio of cruisers to that of Britain, in spite of the great difference in the actual needs of the two countries. There has for .some years past been in a naval policy of America a strong desire to allow no other Power to possess a navy superior to that of the United States, and it would seem that policy still exists. The cable from Washington giving the summary of the American proposals confirms that view. In the first place it stipulates for a similar ratio in auxiliary craft to that which now exists for capital ships, and opposing Japan’s desire for a larger ratio for herself. Then it advocates the retention of the ten thousand maximum tonnage of cruisers, and opposes a possible British-Japanese move for a six or eight thousand maximum; also the retention of five-inch guns for cruisers as against a possible six-inch weapon. While advocating an equality of tonnage with Britain, America prefers to enter upon a building programme rather than call upon Britain to reduce her present cruiser tonnage. As to capital ships, America wishes to leave the matter as fixed at the Washington Conference. Finally her intention is to rule out any discussion as to the Panama Canal. -It would seem that the chance of arriving at an agreement is not particularly bright.