THE NAVY AND SECURITY

Hokitika Guardian, 10 July 1930, Page 3

THE NAVY AND SECURITY

(Otago Daily Times)

The old slogan “The Fleet of England is her all in all” is not beam su much aa of yore in these ways ol the discussion of armament reduction. But it cannot be reassuring to the people of the Empire at large to find tintwo admirals whose names are household words throughout tike British Commonwealth expressing strong protest against the provisions of the tieaty emanating from the recent naval conference.

in the House of Lords last week Lord Beatty declared that Britain, the only nation to widen sca-powei Juca.nt its existence, was l the only Power to make any armament reduction, and “to l this extent the naval treaty had rendered us impotent and incapable of maintaining effective control over the connecting links ol our far-flung Empire.” And Lord Jellicoe, hacking lip to the full these and other contentions advanced by Lord Beatty, declared that the present position should cause the natiion the greatest anxiety. Loyd Parmoor’s reply on behalf ..of the Government was not exactly forceful. It seemed to allow that the Government had been willing to tall in with Air Ramsay '' MacDonald’s view, expressed prior to the Naval Conference, that if an agreement involved a risk, it was one worth taking. The changed world conditions,-Lord Pannoor stated, were sufficient to explain why fifty cruisers 'would give the Empire in 1930 ,a security for which 70 cruisers wore desirable in 1927. The Times lias offered the comment that, while the speeches from Lord Beatt.v. and Lord Jellicoe “must increase our anxiety about our meagre allowance of cruisers,” they will not persuade the great bulk of responsible opinion that the elimination of competitive building between Great Britain, the United States and Japan was not of such great benefit that il justified the Governent accepting the treaty. Such a pronouncement must appear- to balance rather nicely the admitted existence of cause for anx'iefy against sufficient reason for a pious hope, that all will, prove to have, been for the best.

The prospective result of the FivePower . Conference. is that France and Italy may go their way unfettered in respect of naval programmes, that the United States and Japan may increase their cruiser tonnage, while Great Britain is to bring down her cruiser tonnage to accord with the treaty scale. By this arrangement the United States will be able to secure the actual naval parity, about which for some rather mysterious :reason she has been so anxious, on a much more economical basis than would otherwise have been possible for her. The British taxpayer should benefit too, in so far avs the burden, of navy mainteriance may be lightened, but will probably not he conscious of having anything to be thankful for since his burdens lie heavy in their cumulative incidence. Lord Beatty laid emphasis last week on a point in regard ' to' the cruiser question which was brought out forcibly by Lord isnagi.man in an earlier debate in the House of Lords; This had reference to tlie question of cruiser replacement. There is.an article in the treaty the effect of which is that, while Britain’s new cruisers are to have a liie ot 20 years, those of foreign countries may be replaced after a life of sixteen years. As it happens, the United States and Japan have far fewer old ships than Britain, yet replacement is possible for them in a shorter period. Britain can have her fifty cruisers by 193 G, the date up to which iMie Admiralty lias very reluctaiitly agreed upon the acceptance of that reduced number as a minimum necessity to meet her needs, but only by retaining a large number of old -ships incapable rtf equality with the new ships which -other jjoUn tries are allowed to. build.

: Such ti position is conspicuously different from that which prior to the Jxmdon Conference was indicated sis representing Great Britain’s mini muni requirements. Prior to the Geneva Conference the minimum number of cruisers needed bv Great Britain was officially, given as seventy. The reduction of this number, previously described as irreducible, to fifty, is Britain’s greatest concession to .“changed-. conditions” and the Government’s desire for a- policy of “the fullest understanding” with other naval Powers.

'l'he more unfortunate then must it appear that according to the stipulations of the treaty, Britain is precluded from having even this .minimum except by the inclusion of vessels, which under the terms of the treaty, are “over age,” and, if they were in other na.vies, would, be replaced by new tonnage. -No : satisfactory explanation of this anomaly seems to have been afforded. If Lord Jellicoe and Lord Beatty are justified in declaring that ,the present position is such as should cause the British!nation real anxiety such a feeling should be shared by the dominions, which have been so well content ,to relv upon the British navy for protection and security.