VAST ARMAMENTS

Evening Star, Issue 22459, 2 October 1936, Page 9

VAST ARMAMENTS

GREAT NATIONS GF THE WORLD BRITAIN'S NEED FOR STRONG DEFENCES ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL TO EMPIRE’S SAFETY (British Official Wireless.) Press Association —By Telegraph—Copyright RUGBY, October 1. (Received October 2, at noon.) The annual Conservative Party’s conference opened at Margate, some 1,300 delegates attending. The spokesman for the Government on questions of policy was Sir Samuel Hoare, who made the opening speech on defence. He emphasised the gravity of the international situation and the urgent and persistent need for British rearmament. Six months ago, he said, the National Government drew a picture of the vast armaments which had been accumulated by all the great countries of the world. Since then the position had become substantially worse. Small countries had been forced to embark upon large schemes of rearmament. Referring to the position of Germany, Sir Samuel Hoare recalled that she had introduced conscription in March, 1935, and announced a peacetime army establishment of 36 divisions, with a strength of 550,000 men and an air force of outstanding magnitude. Germany was spending at a rate that had been given as £800,000,000 annually on military preparations. This was a formidable enough situation, but since March Germany had extended the military service to two years. France, where a two years’ service was introduced last year, and where the air force was already in process of reorganisation under the Government of the Left, had decided on a further expansion in military, naval, and air material at a cost of £186,000,000. In Sdviet Russia the recruiting age since March had been reduced, with the result of an increase in the vast numbers of effectives and a great expansion of the air force. In Japan the proportion of the public Budget devoted to the army and navy had reached the striking figure of 46 per cent. Even in the United States the expenditure upon armaments was steadily rising. No wise, patriotic citizen could ignore those figures. No wise or patriotic citizen could shut his eyes to the lessons they had to teach. He launched no attacks upon any .country in the world, but the facts and figures stood out beyond fear of contradiction. The first lesson was the futility of onesided disarmament. The second was the need of a greatly strengthened British Empire as a stabilising force on the side of peace. The supposed weakness of the British Empire had been proved by bitter experience to be a disturbing factor in the field of international politics. “ Faced with this situation,” he said, “ we have no alternative but to carry through with the least possible delay our programme of rearma■ment. Much of this programme is absolute and not relative., It is intended to safeguard the British Commonwealth of Nations. The building up of the Fleet and the expansion of the Air Force are absolutely essential, and the re-equipment and strengthening of the Army are no less necessary for the duties it has to perform. We could on no account agree to any disarmament proposals that would stereotype our relative weakness. Our programme is and must be flexible, not rigid, dynamic, not static.” Sir Samuel Hoare recalled the statements of the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary regarding mandates, and went on to say that the Government was as fully aware as anyone of the difficulties and objections to the transfer of the mandates they stood by. Mr Eden’s statement was that the transfer of any mandated territory would inevitably raise grave difficulties. The Government hoped, with so many international problems still unsolved, that there would be in no quarter any desire to introduce further causes of serious difficulties between the nations.