Evening star., 1932-10-09

to four inches. Four inches is the
present limit allowed to Germany.
It is admittedly hard to see how
Great Britain can further reduce the
number of her cruisers. but there is
ample scope for a substantial all
around reduction in SIZE extending
even to the total abolition of the pres
ent sea monsters and their replacement
by ships not exceeding 10000 tons in
size. That would open the way to the
total abolition of the submarine, whose
existence can be defended only as an
answer by those nations who cannot
afford immense battleships.
Would End Tanks
would like to see the tank follow
the submarine into the limbo of dis
carded weapons-there seems little point
in the suggestion to limit it in size to
20 tons.
Similarly, the British governments
proposal merely to restrict" the use
of bombing airplanes rather savors Of
the absurd. The Italian plan of abo-
lition, coupled with a restriction in the
range of all military aircraft to some
$50 miles radius. appears far better
and more practicable. For my own
part. do not hesitate to say that
should like to get rid of practically all
military airplanes.
Constructive plans on these lines,
which could be dovetailed into existing
individual proposals, should surely prove
acceptable to every power processing
sincerity in the desire for peace. France
is the most highly armed nation today
but her whole case rests on the need
she feels for security At the price, per-
haps, of some additional guarantee, it Is
difficult to see how she could object to
a drastic reduction in purely offensive
ornaments.
Voice Of Skeptics.
Skeptics often ask how far voluntary
limitations of this kind could be ex-
pected to hold good in the event of the
outbreak of war 1t seems to me that
they miss the real point of disarmament
in regard to its effect on war. Dis
armament might not prevent war; 1t
sanctions might. and probably would
ultimately share the fate of other
scraps of paper" o1ce the conflict had
begun. But its advocates believe that it
would prevent the sudden attack, the
knockout blow, for this simple reason
adequate weapons would be lacking in
the early stages. Assuming adequate
disarmament to have been an accom-
plished fact, no air attack could take
place for several months.
Far less sensible is the only objection
sometimes raised by leading industrial
ists-that disarmament might tenn
porarily paralyZe the heavy industries,
thereby aggravating the unemployment
problem. Such far-reaching proposals
could not possibly be rushed through
over night, and industry is constantly
facing the necessity of adjusting itself
to meet changing conditions.
Guaranty Needed.
What guaranty exists, 1t may be
asked. that some nation, while out
wardly accepting the disarmament pro-
posalS, will not secretly continue to
prepare for war? Let us remember
that most of the offensive weapons in
question are extremely hard to manu-
facture sub rosa. Furthermore, an in
ternational committee empowered to
watch and investigate would be the
natural accompaniment of any such
agreement.
am hopeful that the near future
may see q substantial advance along
the path have indicated. Much de-
pends upon q Franco-German under
standing. America has spoken her
mind In no uncertain terms and the
Russian question Is at present sub
sidiary. for the Soviet government al
ready haI indicated its willingness to
subscribe TO any arrangements for sub
stantial disarmament, And the gen.
cral situation M whelc IA favorable.
n only because every nation realizes
that tho consequences of q failure 10
hgree would be far too serious 10 con.
template with eauanimity and that
disarmament. and disarmament alone,
can produce both confidence and
| economy.