GENEVA FAILURE

Hokitika Guardian, 6 August 1927, Page 3

GENEVA FAILURE

PRESS CRITICISM ON U.S.A. (Australian & N.Z. Cable Association. LONDON, Aug. I. By a trick of fate, the Naval Conference broke up with its chief aims unaccomplished, on the anniversary of Britain’s entry to the war. The news of the break-up was received hv a special meeting of the Cabinet, alter which the Cabinet adjourned without making any statement. Sir Austen Chamberlain (Foreign Minister) is leaving Downing Street for his Sussex home.

The news was quietly received in London, where the failure of the conference has been regarded as inevitable for some days.

The newspapers, in t heir comments, do not altogether free America from blame, hut stress that there is no need for recrimination because a formula could not lie continued.

The ‘‘ Daii'v Express’’ says: "ft is a relief that we again have a footfree navy. Britain has never taken the American navy into consideration ■alien forming the Navy estimates, and it lias no intention of so doing.” The “Daily Chronicle” says The immediate cause of the failure of the conference was that the American Delegation was unable to make the smallest concession on any material point. They never budged. As their plan ignored the special problem oS defending British trade routes, there was no chance of any agreement. The Americans know that they can afford to Iniild any other Navy out of the water. Accordingly, they want parity. Altogether it has been an unlucky meeting.

SELF- R ELI AX C E PR EAC 11 El). NEW YORK, Aug. I

Tho “ New York Herald Tribune” states: “The dilliculties of the Geneva Conference are so deep seated that they arc likely to endure. The conference never reaily got started! Tf we want parity, then we must depend on our own initiation and on our own resources. 'flic conference was successful because it lias emphasised the value of American self-independence.” Tho “ New York World ” says: “The truth about the Naval Conference is that it was already deadlocked two months before its Geneva opening, when the British Admiralty and the American Navy Depntrment, in April last, had formulated, and had already begun to disagree upon their limitation plans.”

FRANCE AND ITALY CRITICAL NEW YORK, Aug. 5.

Commenting editorially on the result of the Geneva Conference, the “New York Times” states; “A real and effective agreement at Geneva was impossible so long 11s the French and the Ita Via ns were not officially in the conference. Both of these nations must now he smiling broadly, as they think of their astuteness in declining President Coolidge’s invitation. Happy-go-lucky in its nature, the conference was badly conceived and badly conducted, with little diplomatic preparation. Though it has adjourned with empty hands, it was a success because it did not break up in tbe midst of doubled fists.”