NAVAL BASE.

Hokitika Guardian, 30 January 1925, Page 2

NAVAL BASE.

CRITICISM OF SINGAPORE.

AUSTRALIAN AND N.Z. CABLE ASSOCIATION LONDON, January 28. Lieut.-Comandei* Kemvorthv, ALB., in a special article in the “Daily Chronicle,” affirms that the Singapore project has never properly been examined on .strategical grounds, either hero or in Australia. Were this done, I feel sure that the public would agree that hotter value can lie obtained for such an expenditure on the existing clockyard in Sydney than on this white elephant at Singapore. He points out that Sydney already lias considerable sea and land defences, which, if strengthened, to the extent of. making it a first-class naval port, would automatically defend one of the principal cities and centres of wealth in the sub-continent. Moreover, hi: points out that natal dockyards already are in existence at Sydney, into which all but the latest largest vessels can he taken, besides which. the local shipbuilding industry would he able to supply considerable reserves of skilled labour. Commander Tvcmvortliy suggests that any attempt by Japan to conquer Australia could only be essayed by the establishment of a halfway bouse in the Marshall Islands. A British squadron based on Singapore in attempting to cut off the Japanese lines of communication. would make for the Marshall Islands, or counter attack on Yokohama, but it is obvious that the distance is too great for a licet based on Singapore to interfere with such an expedition. The writer further emphasises that Japan is unable to find the tonnage accessary to transport an army big enough to make an impression on tlm Australian forces. :(-,inlander Kenwortliy suggests that it is hotter on the grounds of economics. of politics and of naval strategy to base a battle, fleet in Australia itself. . Sydney, as the base, would have an advantage of climate for the white men. - . Commander Kemvorthv continues: Tn the second place Sydney, as a base, would he defended by an Australian Army, while Singapore would require a large garrison. Thirdely—he points out—Australia, would""ho the recruiting field for the Royal Navy, whereas the inhabitants of Singapore are a mixture of AsiaU Fourthly, a base at Sydney would develop both shipbuilding and engineering among the Australians, who would | )0 willing to huihl up a larger share of the Royal Navy. The Straits of Singapore, he states could he made impassable to raiders into the Indian Ocean by means o heavy gnus, mines submarines and air°Finally, ho says, it is certain that Australia would be willing to bear a greater proportion of the cost o m» '* inw a naval base at Sydney, than one at Singapore, because the money would 1)0 spent ill Australia.