Reduction in Fleets

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 892, 8 February 1930, Page 9

Reduction in Fleets

WAR PUT IN BACKGROUND Nations Ready for Sacrifice AMERICA OUTLINES PARITY BASIS United F. 4. —By Telegraph—Copyright Kecd. 10.30 a.m. LONDON, Friday. AMERICA has made tangible proposals for iieet parity with Britain in every class of ship. It is understood on the best authority that Mr. Ramsay MacDonald and Mr. H. L. Stimson, in the light of America’s new proposals, are determined that if they are unable to reconcile the Franco-Italian demands in the general scheme, the naval conference will produce a definite satisfactory Anglo-American-Japanese agreement.

The American naval proposal may be summarised thus: The United States recedes from lier original claim to have 21 10,000-ton cruisers against Britain's 15. So the respective figures will eventually be: America 18 and Britain 15, thus giving the former the advantage o£ 30,000 tons.

America recognises, however, England’s need of smaller cruisers, in which England will have an excess of 40,000 tons, leaving a net cruiser margin in Britain’s favour of 12,000 tons. The scheme permits Britain to change her programme, if she thinks it necessary, by increasing her large cruisers to 18, and making a proportionate reduction in smaller craft. A reduction of Anglo-American cruiser tonnages is made possible by Japan agreeing not to press for a 10-10-7 ratio, hut accepting a 10-10-6 ratio, thus balancing the fleets of the Pacific.

This will work out a much more favourable scale for the Dominions’ interests, to which Britain’s right to have a preponderance of commerceprotecting cruisers is of major importance. The British Government memorandum, as finally formulated after consultation with the Dominions —who agree to it —is now issued. It gives a definite idea of Britain's attitude regarding the American statement. AGREEMENT TILL 1936 It is proposed that a general agreement resulting from the present conference, shall continue till 1936 and that a further conference, reviewing the situation, shall be held in 1935. Britain therefore suggests an agreement, not only globally, but categorically, that is applicable to air-craft carriers, cruisers, destroyers and submarines, plus eliminating competitive building and maintaining the equilibrium between the fleets. Britain does not favour the general transfer to the other categories of tonnage that is assigned to certain categories, and she opposes the transfer regarding capital ships, air-craft carriers and submarines. She suggests transferring a percentage of eightinch gun criuisers to the six-inch gun class. Britain proposes the number of each power’s capital ships fixed by the Washington Treaty should be reached IS months after the ratification of the treaty resulting from this conference, instead of in 1936. The gist of the British proposal is that she scrap down to 15 as early as possible, namely, demolishing five vessels in 18 months, which is the quickest the Admiralty can manage. There would be no rebuilding before 1936. SHIPS TO BE SCRAPPED The naval correspondent of the “Daily Telegraph” says that if complete parity be achieved next year, Britain must presumably be prepared to scrap the four vessels of the Iron Duke class, now organised as a training squadron, and possibly also the battle-cruiser Tiger. The .United States must discard at least three battleships, the Utah, Florida and Arkansas, or the Wyoming.

A sensible compromise seems to have been reached as regards cruiser tonnage. The difficulty of America’s | 18 ships of Sin. guns as against Brit-

ain’s 15 ships is removed by the proposed system of transfer between the Sin. and 6in. class.

It may be taken for granted, says the correspondent, that competitive building in the heavy cruiser class is now over between the United States and Britain. The same may be said, indeed, of every category of warship. The result will possibly be unpalatable to Amrican economists, as the United States, in order to obtain parity, must build ten 10,000-ton cruisers in addition to the eight already afloat or on the stocks. “The Times,” in an editorial article, says no one in Britain and the United States regards war as within the range of possibility, but navies of approximate equal strength will help to put war completely out of the question and give the nations a sense of comfort and security. POSITION CLARIFIED The situation now is that Britain lias 20 capital ships, the United States 18, Japan 10. The Washington Treaty compels Britain and the United States to reduce to 15 by 1936. In this event, of her 20, Britain scraps 10, and she may build five new ships. The United States scraps 8 of her 18 and builds 5. Japan scraps 4 of her 10, and builds 3. The Iron Duke was Jellicoe’s flag-* ship at the Battle of Jutland. Her sister ships are the Benbow, Marlborough and Emperor of India. These ships were built in 1912 and 1913, displace 26,250 tons, and are armed with 13.5 in guns. The Tiger fought in all the big North Sea actions of the war. The four American ships mentioned were part of the 6th Battle Squadron of the Grand Fleet in the North Sea during 1917 and 1918. AMERICA’S SACRIFICE COMMENT IN UNITED STATES WASHINGTON, Thursday. It is pointed out here that it would be necessary, in carrying out Mr. Stimson’s proposals, for the United States to sacrifice five of the 10,000ton cruisers, called for in the authorised 15-cruiser programme of 1929. The sacrifice would, however, be exclusively in blue prints, as work on none of the ships has been begun. It is furthermore felt that the United States would have nothing to fear in British superiority in total cruiser tonnage, because of America’s greater number of ships of the 10,000-ton type.