THE WAIKATO TIMES With which Is Incorporated The Waikato Argus. TUESDAY, APRIL 1, 1930. THE NAVAL CONFERENCE.

Waikato Times, Volume 107, Issue 17984, 1 April 1930, Page 6

THE WAIKATO TIMES With which Is Incorporated The Waikato Argus. TUESDAY, APRIL 1, 1930. THE NAVAL CONFERENCE.

The Naval Conference is still in deep water, and shows less likelihood of success than it did. The stumbling block is still France, and her argument is security. Her navy at present, all categories, is about 470,000 tons, and she claims the’ right to build up to 730,000 tons. She also claims parity with Italy in the Mediterranean; at what figure is unknown, hut as Italy has not built battleships it should not be an insoluble problem to arrange their difficulties. Reading between the lines it would seem that France has been pursuing her favourite idea of obtaining a guarantee from America and probably from Britain also. Air Borah, the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee of the Senate, has been expressing his conviction that the Government is wavering in its opposition because it speaks of a consultative pact, and says it would be taken as a military guarantee. In this he is probably right, but Ihe truth is that the Kellogg Pact, whipli is America’s contribution to the cause of peace, is of little use without some guarantee of force behind it. It is unlikely that the guarantee would ever be called on, but its existence should be known. Air Slimson, the .American delegate, recognises this and tries to meet it with a consultative pact, but the French will not be put off with anything less than a definite guarantee. Air Hoover seems to think that a consultative pact would

not induce France to moderate her demands, and this is not wonderful. The Americans are still in the stage of being ruled by a democracy that lives on the ideas of a hundred years since. What Washington said decides the matter l'or the rural American, and the rural American controls Ihe Senate. Mr Britten, tino chairman of the Naval Committee of the House of Representatives, is still more openmouthed. Pie says the Conference is a failure, and the American delegates should come home. lie is convinced, too, that Britain is to blame for the failure of the Conference, and apparently has not troubled to follow what is taking place. There arc probably mixed reasons for the obstinacy shown by France over the discussions. It is strange that she should demand the right to build to an extent 50 per cent above her present tonnage, and equally strange that she should claim this as security. It is probably doing her no injustice to suppose that jealousy of the amount of agreement reached by Britain and the United States has something to do with her difficult attitude. Then it must be remembered that the French Government is hampered by the French Parliament. It it; not a strong government, and if it were supposed that concessions had been made the House might refuse to ratify them and might go further and defeat the Government. It is the people, much more than the rulers, who are responsible for .swollen armaments. They demand a large army for security and forget that it stimulates the demand for a large army in other countries. It will probably be found, if the Conference should fail, that Mr Britten is amongst those who demand a large navy. The other reason why France has little desire that tfic Conference should succeed is that she thinks :l should be dealt with by the League of Nations, where she occupies a much more commanding figure than she can do at the Naval Conference. She has alliances and understandings with several of the smaller European Slates and stands a much better chance of arranging decisions to her own wishes. It is possible to sympathise cordially with her wish that the questions could be referred to the League of Nations, where some force would exist to enforce the decisions which were made, but after all we must recognise facts, America is the country with which we wish to make an agreement. She will not come to the League of Nations, so we must try to bring about an agreement in some other way. It would certainly be much bctler if she would co-operate in Ihe work of the League, but she cannot be made to do so, and seeing how reluctant she is to embrace any new idea it is possible she may' never do so. It is gratifying to know that the League grows in strength and authority even without American help, though American help would certainly he of very great value. If the Conference should fail to come to an agreement it will undoubtedly be a blow to the Government at home, hut if they are wise they will not give up the case. Make an agreement with America and let France stand out. She has not built up to the limits set by the Washington Conference, and probably would not build up to the figure which she now demands. If she should do so Britain must amend her programme in 1936, when the agreements come up for revision. There is no great danger in wailing for that date, and if there were some risk might he taken for peace. Nations are always ready to accept the risk of war, and might at times accept the risk of peace. Britain has done more than any other nation in the way of reducing army and navy, but it is a case of virtue being its own reward, as we find that Mr Britten, who presumably speaks for some others beside himself, says Britain is causing the failure of the Conference. Every day we can see proofs that the speaking of the same language is no guarantee against the most complete misunderstanding between nations.