NAVAL LIMITATION

Wairarapa Age, 12 February 1927, Page 5

NAVAL LIMITATION

ANOTHER ARMS CONFERENCE PROPOSED. TO ROUND OFF WASHINGTON TREATIES. ACTION BY PRESIDENT COOLIDGE. WASHINGTON, February 10. President Coolidge has proposed to the Governments of Great Britain, France, Italy and Japan that the limitation of cruisers, destroyers and submarines, and craft not covered by the Washington Treaty, be discussed at the forthcoming Geneva disarmament meeting. The President has sent a message to Congress announcing the presentation of his proposal to the Powers concerned through the American Ambassadors. In his message to Congress, the President said in part: “The American Government and people are convinced that competitive armaments constitute one of the most dangerous contributing causes of international suspicion and discord, and are calculated eventually to lead to war. fThe recognition o this fact and the desire, as far as possible, to remove this danger, led the American Government in 1921 to call the Washington Conference. ~ . . “The Washington Treaty provided for a specific tonnage limitation upon capital ships and aircraft carriers with certain restrictions on other vessels. Every nation has been at complete liberty to build any number of cruisers, destroyers and submarines. Only the size and armament of cruisers arc limited. AN OUTSTANDING SUCCESS. f< The signatories to the Washington Treaty fulfilled their obligations faithfully, and there can be no doubt that the Treaty constitutes an outstanding success in operation. It has been the hope of the American Government constantly expressed since the Conference, that a favourable opportunity might present itself to complete the work, begun here by the eonclusion of further agreements covering cruisers, destroyers and submarines. <f Thc desirability of such an agreement is apparent, since it was only to be expected that the spirit of competition, stifled as regards capita* ships and aircraft carriers by the Treaty, would sooner or later show itself regarding unlimited vessels. Actually, I do not believe that the competitive building of these classes of ships has begun. Nevertheless,, lar-reaching programmes have been laid down by certain and there appeared in our country as abroad a sentiment urging naval construction on the ground that such was taking place elsewhere. In such sentiments lies the germ of naval competition. I am sure that all Governments and all peoples would choose a system of naval limitation in preference to consciously reverting to competitive building.

LOOKING TO THE NAVAL POWERS. “Therefore, in the hope of bringing about an opportunity for discussioa among the principal naval Powers to ascertain whether further limitation is practicable, I have suggested that negotiations begin as aoon as possible. The moment seems particularly opportune. The earnest desire of the nations of the world to relieve themselves, in as great measure as possible of the burden of armaments and to avoid the dangers of competition is shown by the establishment of a preparatory commission for a Disarmament Conference which met at Geneva last May. This is continuing its work with a view to preparing an agenda for a final general conference ” After observing that he recognised that th’e problems of land and air armaments in Europe were beset with difficulties and that the American Government would hesitarte to make specific proposals on this subject to European nafions, President Coolidge continued: “The problem of the limitation of naval armament, while not of regional character or susceptible to regional treatment, has been successfully treated in part by agreement among tjie five leading naval Powers and in my opinion can be definitely dealt with by further agreements among those Powers. AN IMMEDIATE EFFORT. “It will be a contribution to tho success of the preliminary work now going on at Geneva, should the great naval Powers there agree upon a definite limitation of naval armament. It is my intention that the American representatives at Geneva should continue to discuss with the representatives of the other Powers there a programme for a general limitation of armaments conference. If such a conference should be possible in the ( future on a basis generally acceptable, this Government would, of course, be highly gratified. Pending the formulation of a plan for such a general conference, however, I believe that we should make an immediate and sincere effort to solve the problem of naval limitation, a solution which would do much to make the efforts towards a more general disarmament successful.”—(A. and N.Z.) DANGERS OF DELAY. POWERS SHOULD ACT AT ONCE. WASHINGTON, February 10. A memorandum handed to the Powers by the American Ambassadors urges that failure to agree upon a definite programme of armament limitations, even if it were only a partial agreement, would constitute a set-back in .the cause of international peace too great to deserve serious contemplation as a possibility. The memorandum then points out that the final Geneva Conference will probably not be able to meet during tho present year, and the coming into effect of agreements reached by it might be delayed for a considerable period for a multitude of reasons. The American Government therefore believes that those Powers which are in a position to engage in further limitation now would not bo justified in postponing their efforts in that direction.— (A. and N.Z.) Another Washington message states that both Democratic and Republican lending Senators have heartily approved President Coolidge’s disarmament proposals. Senator, Hale, chairman of the Senate Naval Appropriations Committee, however, pointed out that the President’s proposals would have no immediate effect on the proposed cruiser construction. The building of the new cruisers contemplated would improve the position of the United