Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-10-11
The AnglO-American Naval Accord.


One type Of mentality holds that it is
possible to bring nations to agreement,
even In the matter of peace, only
through force. If, for example, there Is
to be real and effective operation OF
the Kellogg multilateral treaty renounc-
ing war as a means of settling interna-
tional disputes. there must be force
back of 1t, teeth" in 1t. It is the same
kind of mentality that believes in
political League of Nations and an in
ternational police force. Nothing was
further from the thought of the United
States when it undertook to bring about
the negotiation of the Kellogg treaty.
It has been stated repeatedly that the
treaty was to be entered into with the
full understanding that each nation
stood on its own bottom, and that there
was to be no coercion, and that the
pact would be observed because the in
dividual nations had pledged themselves
to observe it. Under any other circum-
stances the United States Senate would
never have ratified the treaty.
The American and British govern
ments, through their executive heads,
have reached an understanding on
naval strength. That understanding
has been made possible largely because
of the new situation created by the
adherence, not only of these two ma
lions. but of all the other powers, to
the Kellogg treaty renouncing war. In
some quarters there is disposition now
10 say that Great Britain and the United
States in their naval agreement pro-
pose to force the world to international
peace. Probably nothing could be
more inimical to a final naval limita-
ton and reduction agreement with the
other powers. France, Italy and Japan,
regarded as great naval powers along
with the United States and Great Brit
ain, do not relish the thought that the
English-speaking countries shall COM
bine to force upon the rest OF the world
peace, or anything else, particularly If
the peace is the special brand of Amer
lea and Britain, whatever that may be.
President Hoover and Prime Minister
Macdonald have done all In their power
during their conversations over naval
limitation to make it clear that there
is no question Of an alliance, substantial
or implied, between the two countries.
Both have understood that the great
est danger to the success of the pro-
posed five-power naval conference, to
be held next January in London, lies
in suspicious of the other powers that
any form of alliance or special under
standing exists between Britain and
America, exclusive of all other nations.
The Anglo-American naval accord, they
have insisted, is but a prelude to an
accord which will take in all the other
nations.
The purpose of the two governments
will be to work for world peace and to
help maintain it, but nothing could be
more clear than the statement that the
parts played by the British and Amer
lean governments will be different;
that the British will cooperate closely
with their neighbors on the Continent,
NAAhC VIII 10 dQneTe
to its traditional policy of not becom-
ing entangled in European diplomacy.
This does not smack of Anglo American
alliances. or implied alliances.
An Anglo American alliance, If it had
the effect of aligning all continental
Europe against Britain and this coun-
try, might prove very uncomfortable
thing for Britain, and would scarcely
have an appeal for the people of the
United States.
The British government, through its
prime minister, has definitely pledged
itself to peace with the United States
to naval parity and thereby to re-
linquishment of the old claim of Brit
ish supremacy of the seas. But peace
between Britain and America is very
different thing from an agreement of
any kind between the two countries to
force peace on the rest of the world
A great benefit was conferred by