Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-01-29
5-YEAR PACT SEEN
FARLEY SOLUTION
Agreement Would Cover All
AuxiIiarieS and Avoid
Rating Powers.
Continued From First page.)

1886 there would be new conference
Meanwhile, general disarmament
conference would presumably be held
under the auspices of the League of
Nations.
Naturally, at the 1885 Naval Confer
ence, each nation would resume its en-
tire liberty of action, but 1t is believed
that the international situation by that
time will be improved to such an extent
that all will be ready to make further
reductions.
This plan has not yet been officially
presented to the conference, but it is
being talked around. Indications are
that the United States and France are
frankly favorable and Great Britain and
Japan are sufficiently interested to want
more details, but Italy for the moment
is hostile because it would leave its basic
demand for parity with France theo-
retically unsettled. 1t Is confidently be-
neved, however, that all will adopt it in
good time.
The benefits C this plan may be
briefly enumerated as follows:
Postponement of capital ship re-
placement would save the United States
more than $500, 000, 900 and save sums
proportionately as great to Great Brit
ain and Japan. There would be some
building, certainly, but considerably less
than If no agreement had been reached,
and probably there would even be con-
siderable reductions in the present
building programs of att least some of
the nations here represented.
Advantage Of Short Period.
The short duration of the treaty
namely, five years-would keep it to
something like q foreseeabie length of
time and enable the nations to take en-
gagements which they would hesitate to
assume for a longer period. It leaves
five years in which to study quietly
the perpleXing question OF the battle
ship and whether it should be ultimate
ly reduced in size and, If so, to what
size.
It eliminates, as has been said, all
questions of prestige. No nation would
be obliged to write itself down perma-
nently or even for long period as an
inferior power.
It seems an easy way out of the din
culties presented by the Franco Italian
dispute over parity and the japanese
percentage claims.
1t obviates the necessity Of calling
other nations, as Germany and Spain,
into this conference, for they viii par
ticipate in the general disarmament
It eliminates the necessity OF making
additional security pacts here. It Is un-
derstood that the French have already
dropped their Mediterranean pact pro-
posal. Some delegates, however, still
believe that an agreement for consulta-
ton under the Kellogg pact would be
useful.
Plan Still General.
Naturally, this plan Is still merely
general in character, and all the de-
tails of tonnage and categories would
have to be laboriously elaborated. Also,
the nations here represented Will have
to be convinced that there is no other
useful way out before they adopt 1t.
The Italian, which thus far is the
only real opposition to the plan, seems
to assume that this plan Is similar to
the one already presented at Geneva
by the French delegate, Paul Boncour,
and already rejected by Italy.
The Italians are opposed because they
say that it means more building and
Italy has no money to build, and still
hopes for an agreement here which VIII
arrest building altogether. They imply
that acceptance of this plan would
oblige Italy, II 1t Is to achieve real
naval parity with France, to build be-
yond its means.
The Italians are hoping earnestly Tor
British support In their own plan to
impose fixed ratios on every one. They
are understood not to object, however,
to making the duration of the new
treaty flve years.