Evening star., 1932-01-24
GENEVA CONFERENCE HAS
BACKGROUND OF FAILURES
Paris Peace, Washington, Geneva and
London Parleys Are Held
Without Success.

! protest against this condition, President
| Coolidge, in 1927, procured a confer
ence at Geneva. Italy and France
refused to attend, but Britain and ia
pan were present. From the start
however, this conference was doomed
because British and American theses
were hopelessly at variance. At the out
set the British were not willing to con-
cede parity at all. In the latter stages
they assented only on the basis of ton
mage figures so high as to foreshadoW
an incredible expansion of naval arma-
mentS. On the one hand the British
were satisfied that America would not
build up to the high figures; on the
other the Americans were committed to
the double program of parity and limi-
tation.
Geneva, therefore, failed, and failed
in the midst of an explosion of bad
feeling in America and Britain GER
tainly not paralleled since the Vene-
Zuelan episode in the Cleveland admin
iStration. When, however, following
the Coolidge conference American pub
lie feeling clearly foreshadowed a pur-
pose to achieve parity by building, if
necessary, there was a far-going change
in British sentiment. The mass of the
country, beginning at last to realize the
IlOll DSVWCW2 bIlllSll dllu
American wealth and resources. saw
more clearly than their Tory govern
ment the futility of competition and
presently turned to a Labor control.
One Of the major purposes of Ram
say Macdonald on taking Office was to
bring about an adjustment of the naval
dispute between the two English-speak-
ing countries, and to that end he took
the unprecedented step of crossing the
ocean. Beside the Rapidan Macdonald
and Hoover laid the bases for Anglo
American naval parity to be ratified
at the London conference and also
agreed upon in their discussions. Par
ity was after nearly 10 years of dispute
to be achieved.
London Failure Assured.
Nevertheless the failure of the Lon
don conference was insured because on
the one hand the American President
and the British premier were agreed
that the conference must include
France and Italy and on the other
hand both had totally ignored French
susceptibilities and French opinions
and placed the French in the situation
Of having to ratify, indeed to sign on
the dotted line, although they had not
been parties to the preliminary discus
sions
The French, therefore, came to Lon
don resolved not to agree to any naval
program fixed by Hoover and MacDon-
aid save as they, in return were re-
warded by treaty giving them secur-
ity against italian aspirations in the
Mediterranean. The Italians, on their
side, came resolved upon having naval
parity with France, the whole question
of the prestige of the Mussolini regime
being involved in the matter.
There were then three wholly irrecon-
cilable European theses in shock at
London. Britain demanded a two
power standard In Europe. France in
sisted upon two-power standard in
the face of Germany and Italy. Italy
demanded parity with France AS for
the United States. it desired parity
with Britain on the basis of figures
agreed upon at the Rapidan, which
meant on the basis of very low ton
mage totals. We wanted cheap parity
with Britain, Britain wanted cheap
security In Europe. France wanted
security through Anglo-American as
surances. Italy, like the United States,
desired cheap parity, but with France.
AS a consequence no definite five
power treaty was possible. The United
States, Britain and Japan made con-
ditional agreement to last until 1885,
although even here Japan pushed her
ratio from the 1916 of Washington to
the 10-7 of London. In a word the
British said to the Americans, I'VE will
stand by the figures of the Rapidan
provided the French and Italians DO
not in the meantime build in such fash
ion as to endanger our two-power
standard in European waters" Anglo
American parity was thus established
in principle, but the size of the fleets
required to make this parity effective
was left conditional upon Franco
Italian naval programs.
No Progress Since London.
And, despite all the later efforts to
settle the Franco-Italian issue, the
question remains precisely where it was
left at London. France will not resign
her claim to tWo-power standard in
the face of Italy and Germany, as
Britain will not surrender her claim to
two-power standard in the face of
France and Italy. Thus, the size of the
American feet remains conditioned
upon the state of Franco italian COM
petition. And, as after the Washing
ton conference, Franco-British relations
became bitter and after the Geneva
conference Anglo American recrimina-
ton was general, so after London
Franco italian disputes disturbed Eu-
ropean tranquility.
In sum, then, our four great post
war conferences have failed more or
less completely and always for the
same reason. Invariably cur delega-
tions have set out to impose an Ameri-
can solution without regard to Eu-
ropean conditions or policies. At
Paris, Wilson did not get a peace of
understanding but the treaty OF Yer
sailles, at Washington Hughes did not
get an end of Anglo-American compe-
tition, but only the substitution of a
race in cruisers, in which we started
badly, for a race in capital ships, which
we had almost won. At Geneva Glib
son got nothing and gave nothing, as
the conference broke up in a fight. At
London we won the academic right to
parity, but only on the basis OF a cer-
tain expenditure of 81 000,00O,OO In
new construction and the possible ne
cessity for further indefinite expendi-
ture resulting from French and Italian
pprnretitinY1