ARMAMENTS CONFERENCE

Hokitika Guardian, 22 June 1927, Page 3

ARMAMENTS CONFERENCE

(Australian A X.Z. Cable Association.)

AMERICAN VIEWS.. (Received this day at 0.30 a.in.) Washington, June 22. The Japanese naval limitation proposals are favourably received by officials, as displaying a conciliatory spirit, satisfaction with the present strength of her navy and a willingness to remain in a position of comparative inferiority ill all classes of ships to Britain and United States. The British proposal is regarded as unsatisfactory. insofar as it affects questions decided at, Washington Conference, which the administration feels should not I discussed by tlie present conference liecnuse of the absence of two signatories in 1922 treaties.

I.OHD J'KLLICOE’S views. (Received this (lay at 10.25 a.m.) GENEVA, June 21. Lord Jelliooe interviewed, offered the following comments on itlie British proposals, which he said were not only his personal opinions hut those of the whole British delegation:—“The essence of the British proposals is their extreme frankness. I cannot conceive a hotter method of arriving a,t a good result than for each nation saying definitely what it wants and why it wants it. If all delegates place all their cards on the table and show each other the exact pointing rf tlieiir naval defence, we must 'he prepared to defend our demands for the various numbers and types of vessels. The whole world knows the British navy is a. matter of defence of trade routes, without which Britain could mt exist and the Dominions and colonies could not market their produce. Britain in this respect is in a different position from other countries. Japan is the nearest to our position in Tier dependence on imports. We can and are wiling to show the world what we need to defend the sea routes. We lvelieve if others do the same, according to their own requirements, it should cventuallv provide a basis for an agreement. Tt seems obvious to me that when we come to details our first effort should he to reduce the size of ships in different classes. We propose to reduce battleships by five thousand tons, and cruisers, except those of 10,0C0 tons built under the Washington Treaty to 7500 tons. Anybody who recollects pre-war competitive shipbuilding must he convinced the Britisii proposals contain the germ of an agreement. The system of reducing the size of warships was recognised at Washington. It seems most logical to us to pursue this method, and try to reduce other classes ns well as battleships. For instance, most nations claim the submarine is a defensive weapon. As such it should he considerably reduced in size. Ndbod.v can px-sihlv call a submarine of 1200 or 2000 tons a defensive weapon. For coastal defence submarines do not need to be anything approaching these sizes. Lord Jellicoe endorsed entirely the British naval experts examination of British compared with American and Japanese proposals, cabled last night.