Not a Mere Gesture

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 872, 16 January 1930, Page 9

Not a Mere Gesture

BRITAIN’S TERMS FOR REDUCED NAVY All Nations Must Agree CRUISER REDUCTION CRITICISED British Official Wireless Received 12.20 p.m. RUGBY, Wednesday. THE British Government, in outlining its policy at the FiveBower Naval Conference, says it is determined to do everything within its power to show the world that it is prepared to proceed step by step to a satisfactory solution of the disarmament problem. But everything is dependent on an international agreement. Britain will take no step toward disarmament merely as a gesture.

The first plenary session of the Five-Power Naval Conference, which begins at lit o’clock in the Royal Gallery of the House of Lords on next Tuesday morning, is expected to last for two hours. Speeches will be simultaneously broadcast from British stations and will be transmitted also on the British Broadcasting Company’s short-wave Empire station SSW to enable them to be relayed in the Dominions and elsewhere. After the opening speech by King George, the Prime Minister, Mr. Ramsay MacDonald, will speak and will be followed in turn by Mr. H. L. Stimson, United States, M. Tardieu, France, Signor Grandi, Italy, Mr. R. Wakatsuki, Japan, Mr. Ralston, Canada, Mr. Fenton. Australia, Mr T. M. Wilford, New Zealand, Mr. T. E. Water, Union of South Africa, and Sir Atul Chandra Chatterjee, India. The following may be regarded as an authoritative statement regarding the British Government’s attitude on the eve of the conference. The expressed aim of the British Government in entering the conference is to achieve a. maximum reduction in naval armaments commensurate with international security, avoiding proposals that would wreck the chances of an agreement, and bearing constantly in mind the extent of the British Empire and its dependence on the navy for protection of her seaborne trade and maritime communications. INFLUENCE OF TREATIES Justification for the hope that a great reduction may safely be realised is to be found primarily in the numerous instruments for entrenching security which have been signed since the war, the Covenant of the League of Nations, the Washington Treaty, the Locarno Treaties, the Optional Clause and the Pact of Paris are the most notable of these instruments, but in addition there have been a number of regional agreements to which the signatories attach considerable importance for the maintenance of world peace. The cumulative effect of these agreements, it is felt, will be to make some advance in the direction of naval disarmament possible for, in the view of the Government, the military force must bear some relation to the immediate risk of war, which, as the result of these agreements, has been reduced. It is bad statesmanship to maintain armaments beyond necessity. It is the opinion of the Government that the dangerous tendency within recent years to expand world naval armament may, unless checked, lead to competition. LONGER LIFE FOR SHIPS There are three ways in which the problem of naval reduction may be approached: First, by a reduction of fleets in being; secondly, by a reduction of programmes sanctioned by the various Governments; and thirdly, by the extension of the life of existing ships in regard to battleships. The Washington Treaty left the age of battleships at 20 years. If that life can be extended at the coming conference to 25 years, the result will be equivalent to a reduction. As to cruisers, Che problem is largely that of a distribution of tonnage within cruiser categories, and of an agreement upon what should he the equilibrium as between nation and nation in the number of cruisers. If, without sacrificing security, an agreement can be reached on these lines, stopping competition, then the power and force of political agreement to prevent war is automatically strengthened, and the prospect of more complete disarmament when the time comes to review the agreements, is improved. ALL NATIONS MUST AGREE In setting out on the tasks of the conference, the British Government, therefore, bases itself on the assumption that for a considerable period peace is secure, and that the mere fact that a naval agreement is reached will increase the feeling of security. Even if the result of the conference does not fulfil all the hopes of those responsible for convening it. Britain can only move on condition that other nations move correspondingly, and any agreement which comes out of the conference must really represent an international policy.

An international agreement to extend the life and reduce the size and gun power of replacement battleships

would be a great step forward. An agreement regarding cruisers as to the number, size and distribution, would also represent a most valuable advance. As to submarines, the Government favours their complete abolition, but failing that, they aim at a reduction in their size and number to a minimum. Here again, however, the question arises of achieving a satisfactory equilibrium between nations, and a discussion of this point at the conference will be highly important. It is fully recognised that the points of view of the individual nations, if unduly stressed, might destroy the chance of valuable results. So far as the British Government is concerned, it will go into the conference prepared to favour proposals which will represent not merely its own point of view, but which will represent the most helpful basis for reaching a general agreement. OTHERS MUST GIVE DANGERS OF CRUISER REDUCTION NAVY LEAGUE AND KELLOGG PACT Reed. Noon. RUGBY, Wednesday. Viscount Bridgeman, First Lord of the Admiralty in the late Conservative Government, in addressing q, special public meeting of the Navy League, spoke on the subject of the Naval Conference. He said the cruiser problem was the difficulty in 1927, and it was the most serious difficulty now. Our building policy had been one of slow replacement, and within the next 10 years, 35 of our existing cruisers would be obsolete. He referred to the statement of Mr. A. V. Alexander, present First Lord of the Admiralty, that we were willing to reduce our cruiser strength to 50 ships. He said Mr. Alexander’s reason for this was most unconvincing. It was that the Kellogg Fact had made all the difference between the 70 cruisers we wanted in 1927 and the 50 we wanted now. If the Kellogg Pact was the only reason, why should It have such a curiously different effect upon different countries. Apparently it caused other countries to increase their cruisers and Great Britain was the only one which was led to reduce. “We cannot go on giving something for nothing,” Viscount Bridgeman added. He believed an agreement could be reached in the spirit of give-and-take, but other people,must give as well as ourselves. A ROMANTIC TOUCH DELEGATES SPEED TO LONDON FOR EARLY TALKS HINT OF BRITISH POLICY LONDON, Wednesday. It is learned that the United States Secretary of State, Ml’. H. L. Stimson, is hurrying to London presumably in order to have a chance of conferring with Mr. MacDonald, M Tardieu and others before the Naval Conference. The liner George Washington, in which he is travelling, has put on extra speed in an effort to reach Plymouth on Thursday night in time to enable the American delegates to arrive in London early on Friday morning. Mr. Stimson may spend the weekend at Chequers. The “Daily Telegraph’s” political writer says he hears a hint that the broad lines of the British proposals may be indicated before the conference settles down.

The seating arrangements for the historic opening ceremony have been fixed. On the King’s right, in the order named, will be the French, Canadian and Australian delegates, with the Americans on the extreme right. On his Majesty’s left will be the representatives of Britain, India, the Irish Free State, Italy, Japan, New Zealand and South Africa. The speeches will be relaying from 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. The King will be followed by Mr. MacDonald. Then will come the leaders of the delegations.