The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1928-10-23
KEEPING UP
With
THE NE WIS
BY LUDWELL DENNY

! copyright, ScrlppS.ao"aro newspapers
XXTASHINGTON, Oct. 23.-Amer-
w lean suspicion and distrust of
the secret" Anglo French naval
agreement has not been diminished
by belated publication in London
and Paris today of certain corre-
spondence relating to that deal.
The United States government, as
represented by both state and navy
departments, continues of the opin-
ion that the agreement aims to limit
American type ships without limit
ing British and French types, and
thus is aimed directly against
Americans known interests.
There is no general disposition
here to accept as adequate the off,
cial theory Of the London and Paris
governments that the agreement is
now dead" The foreign "alibi" is
as follows:
That Britain and France were in
basic disagreement on naval limita-
tons at meetings of the leagues
Geneva preparatory arms limita-
ton commission. That, in the in
terest Of a later general agreement,
it first was necessary for Britain
and France to settle their differ
ences, thus enabling them to present
a joint compromise agreement for
consideration of the United States
and other naval powers. That,
American Ambassador Gibson, while
at Geneva, encouraged such sepa-
rate negotiations. That, the joint
Anglo French agreement, having
been rejected by Washington, auto
matically ceases to exist because it
no longer can be used as a practi-
cable basis OF helpful discussion at
a naval conference.
In the judgment of Washington
that "alibi" is an oyersimplification
of the situation.
THROUGH nominally the British
4 French transaction was only a
tentative proposal" it is in fact
an agreement. more or less perma-
nent. For whatever the purpose of
the London-Paris negotiations, three
things are clear:
/. Those negotiations continued
over period of many months, in
volving elaborate exchange Of in
formation and cooperation.
2. Those long negotiations result
ed in an understanding between
those two governments regarding
joint interests and joint policy,
which continues to exist, despite the
fact that United States opposition
for the moment prevents London
and Paris from putting the naval
side Of their agreement into effect.
3. London, in exchange for French
acceptance Of the British cruiser
policy, agreed in turn to accept
French policy on land armament
and reserves.
The next effect of this is that
Paris permits Britain to control the
seas through naval supremacy over
all other nations, while London per-
mits France through her system of
CONSUMPTION, reserves and superior
army, to continue military hege-
mony over disarmed Germany and
the rest of Europe.
The general disposition here I'M
officially is to be disappointed in
the apparent determination of
France and her European allies to
perpetuate the expensive and pro-
vocative system of large land arma-
ments, which the World war and
peace treaty was supposed to make
unnecessary.
But officially there is not the
slightest intention to interfere in
any way with European land arma-
ments.
THIS rigid policy of noninter-
Il ference in distinctly European
affairs, does not, however, prevent
the European armament situation
from materially influencing Ameri-
cas- attitude.
For instance, while not interfer-
ing with Frances right to continue
her expensive military hegemony of
Europe, now apparently underwrit-
ten by the Anglo-French pact, the
United States is even less disposed
than ever to reduce or cancel fur
ther the French and British debts
to America.
Apart from such general consid-
erations, there remains the specific
naval situation created by the Anglo
French pact Since before the
Washington naval conference, which
limited capital ships, the United
States has been trying unsuccess-
fully to get the other nations to
limit cruisers and other auxiliary
ships
According to American naval men,
such parity limitation" has been
blocked always by Britain, as it was
quite blocked openly by Britain at
the Coolidge Geneva conference a
year and a half ago.
If Britain could prevent such a
limitation agreement, how much
more impossible will be such a par
ity limitation" in the future, now
that both France and Britain are
standing together against it.
That is the argument of Ameri-
can navy men. They add that the
United States must begin at once to
build up a new cruiser and auxil-
larry naval strength to equal that of
Great Britain. Hence, Secretary of
the Navy Wilbur's statement for
Navy day next Saturday:
"These fundamental conditions
furnish the reason for our insistence
upon parity Of naval strength with
any other power"
!
/ This Date i'm