LIMITING NAVIES

Sun (Auckland), Volume 1, Issue 78, 23 June 1927, Page 9

LIMITING NAVIES

Japan Cannot Accept 5-5-3 Ratio for Other Than Capital Ships THE THREE POWERS’ CONFERENCE By Cable. —Press Association. — Copyright. s* a m - RUGBY, June 22. eeORDING to press telegrams from Geneva, Admiral Saito, chief Japanese delegate at the Naval Conference, announced to Mr. Gibson, chief United States delegate, that, while willing to make concessions in other points, Japan could not accept 5-5-3 ratio for other than capital ships, as Japan must adapt her navy to the special needs of her position.

The proposals of the three Powers continue to be discussed and examined in committee and outside. In particular there Is an Interest in the extent to which acceptance will be forthcoming for the principles underlying the British proposals, which are an extension of the accepted life of ships, thereby postponing renewal, and effecting an obvious economy and a reduction in the size of the guns carried. The British proposals would not disturb the Washington Conference ratio regarding capital ships, hut it is proposed that capital ship 3 should have their life extended from 20 to 25 years, their tonnage reduced from 35,000 to 30,000 tons, and the size of their guns reduced from 16-inch to 13.5 inch. SURPRISE TO BRITAIN In regard to other ships, it is clear that the three countries are differently situated, and have therefore different needs, consequently the best procedure in the British view is that the delegations should lay ail their cards on the table, and state precisely what they want and why they want it. It would then be immediately apparent to the naval technicians whether the specified requirements are ustifiable for defensive purposes, and whether the process of mutual scaling down would become feasible. Some surprise is expressed in British circles at the part of the American schedule, in which a destroyer is allowed a tonnage up to 3,000 tons, and a cruiser up to 10,000 tons, exclusively of fuel, which would mean a further increase of several hundred tons. These figures are considered unnecessarily high, and a destroyer of 3,000 tons is generally

classed as almost a cruiser. The British scheme proposes 1,400 tons for destroyers and 1,750 tons for flotiila-leaders, and 7,500 tons for all cruisers not covered by the Washington Agreement. The point is important in view of the general tendency to build to the maxima permissible. In regard to submarines, Britain also advocates a limit of 1,600 tons surface displacement of large submarines. If submarines are to be regarded as defensive weapons, then there should be a very considerable reduction in their size. It is contended that submarines between 1,200 and 2,000 tons are not defensive. —A. and N.Z. FORTIFICATIONS Discussion Unlikely GENEVA, Wednesday. Japan does not intend to raise the question of fortifications in general, and the Singapore naval base in particular, at the Naval Arms Limitation Conference between the United States, Britain and Japan, which is now sitting at Geneva. In the course of an interview, one of the Japanese naval experts said it was understood from the beginning that the question of fortifications would be outside the scope of the conference. It was true that it was intimately connected with naval defence, and it might be referred to in the course of conversations, but Japan certainly at present had no intention of raising the question. —A. and N.Z.