NAVAL PROBLEM.

Taranaki Daily News, 28 December 1921, Page 5

NAVAL PROBLEM.

ATTITUDE OF FRANCE. EXCESSIVE DEMANDS. SCHEME DELAYED. By Telegraph.—Press ▲in.—Copyright. Washington, Dec. 26. Observers in close touch with the French I we 11 on their bitterness at what they term the inconsiderate way in which they were treated at the Conference. It hurts their pnde that they were not called into the deiibera. ons of naval armament until the Three had settled the ratio, and then they were told in effect that they must accept. This feeling of soreness is manifesting itself, noj only in their unaccommodating attitude and extravagant demands for tonnage of both capital ships and submarines, though perfectly aware that these cannot be secured, but also in intense irritation with Britain, whom they feel has out-manoeuvred them throughout. Therefore they are engaged in the old game of twisting the lion’s tail. This is apparent, though expressed with perfect politeness, in the speeches of both M. Sarraut and Admiral de Bon during the submarine discussion. As an instance there is a sting even in M. Sarraut’s tribute to the part played in the war by the British Navy, which, “working with the French Navy, did so much to make victory certain.” Many other similar veiled sneers occurred during the debate, until even the urbane Mr. Balfour reminded them that anybody looking at the matter from a strictly strategical and tactical viewpoint would certainly conclude from the geographical position that France wanted to build a large mass of submarines against Britain. This brought a backdown by M. Sarraut and more compliments and disavowals, but the incident was illuminating.

Foewbly their irritation obscured their reasoning and prevented them from realising the result of their actions. It cannot be doubted that their action in asking for an enormous increase in tonnage at a conference specially called to discuss limitation is the subject of much adverse comment among other delegations, so that France, tf she maintains her position, faces the danger of isolai.on, which M. Briand is so anxious about. This may be the cause of the assertions from Paris that France intends to suggest as the price of her conceding the submarine restriction the formulation of multiple-Power treaties dealing with the Atlantic and Mediterranean in the tame way as the Four-Power Pact deals with the Pacific. It is most doubtful whether this will be acceptable to the American Administration. which must consider the attitude of the Senate. UNSATISFACTORY DELAY. AWAITING FRANCE’S DECISION. Received Dec. £7, 9.20 p.m. Washington Dec. 27. Owing to the French delegation not having received definite replies to cables sent to Paris there will be no meeting of the naval committee till Wednesday. These continual delays, due to France’s unaccommodating attitude, are proving most irritating to the varicvs delegations. There is no indication whatever regarding France’s reply, but it is possible she will present alternative proposals. either tonnage as high as Britain’s. or another conference.

The British fight for th? abolition of the submarine is continuing. Widespread comment everywhere characterised the splendid example of cogent reasoning as not only a personal triumph for Mr. A. J. Balfour, but one of the few examples where arguments and an array <rf facts swing many listeners from open opposition a long way towards favoring abolition of the submarine.