New-York tribune., 1920-12-17
Disarmament

ieadlng the country IN policy OF
pusillanimous pacifsm from 1913 to
1917, eventually wasting billions
from unpreparedness, now advocates
spending s1,358,0 100000 for the army
and navy. If this money is spent as
proposed, the United States will lead
the world in a new race for arma-
ment. We should calmly consider the
situation before subjecting this ma
ton to the charge of laying the foun-
dation for war in 1921, as did the
Central Powers in the years before
1914.
In the first place, let US consider
the army problem. Recent develop
ments in the offensive and defensive
attributes Of aviation, mines, torpe-
does and submarines conspire to
make it impossible to send large
armies across the Atlantic or the
Pacific in helpless transports, how
ever they may be conveyed, against
any nation properly supplied with
these weapons of underwater and
above-water attack and defense. In
other words, it would appear that
large armies will be employed here
after only in continental. not in in
tercontinental, wars. The United
States cannot be invaded from Eu-
rope or from Asia. Similarly we
cannot safely invade European or
Asiatic countries. The size of our
army, after properly garrisoning
our far-away possessions, may there
fore be determined by the probable
dangers at home or on the American
continent. This statement chal-
Ienges contradiction.
War overseas-that is, between
nations separated by the Atlantic or
the Paciic-can be waged only by
navies hereafter. This fact neces-
sarily empha sizes the importance of
navies.
Sea power becomes more inpor-
tant than ever. But we must keep
constantly in mind the further fact
that sea power to-day depends
largely upon submarine power and
air power. A surface navy alone
will not suffice. A three-plane nnvy
IS forced upon us. At present it is
imperative to spend our money
largely upon the upper and lower
planes-for aviation and sub
marines.
The surface navy Of the United
States ranks next to that Of Great
Britain in power. Omitting Great
Britain, 1t is stronger than the COM
bined navies Of all European ma
tons. England Is the only country
in Europe with the necessary force
: to war with US upon the sea. Is
there the slightest possible danger Of
war between the United States and
p Great Britain? Such a crime is un-
believable. The English-speaking
peoples Of the earth will not war
with each other. Should they do 80
1t would mean the end Of peace for
all time in this world.
Outside of Europe there Is only
one nation that could war with the
United States upon the sea-Japan.
But war with Japan would be almost
as unthinkable and criminal as war
%ith England. The agitators in
both countries should be suppressed.
They are as dangerous as were the
kaisers, cars and Bernhardis Of
Europe
Moreover, our navy is almost SO
per cent stronger than that Of japan
S-.day. We have no reason, there
fore, TO challenge Japan TO build
more dreadnoughts. Still less Is it
reasonable 10 threaten her. But we
have an undoubted right to adopt
purely defensive measures. Our
feet, now divided and disrupted bv
the rule Of ignorance and politics in
the Navy Department, should be i'm
meciately reunited, reorganized,
fully manned and stationed in the
Pacific. Our naval bases there
should be developed Our outlying
possessions everywhere should be
. provided with airplanes, submarines.
torpedoes, mine. and degtroyers.
These are purely defensive, not ap-
gressive, measures. The expense in
:, VOWED is far less than that of build
4 ing more dreadnoughts.
Reviewing the situation, there in
every reason why the United States
{ should strive to preserve the stnt,1s
qsSo. Safe from invasion, and with
ethA- second navy In the world, we
should b willing TO join with Eng
land and Japan In = generous and
4yisndly agreement TO stop the race
1px armament, Three Of thu most