Evening star., 1932-03-17

decided in the unofficial studies to
take the French colonial army as the
basis. The ratio of the troops sta
toned there to the population in the
French colonies was 5.51.
Present Status of Armies.
Naturally, before the disarmament
treaty is finally concluded, other fac
tors than population, namely area,
length of frontiers and the political sit
uatlon, might have to be considered,
but taking population alone and ap-
plying the two foregoing ratios to the
principal countries, the following in
teresting results appear:
Germany's army and navy are en-
tirely for internal order, with no sup
Elementary force for defense against
external aggression.
France needs 384, 600 men for internal
order at home and in the colonies, and
has now an additional 387 900, pre-
sumably for defense against aggres-
sion.
Italy needs $4,000 for internal use
and has $4,000 additional against ag-
gression.
Great Britain needs 800 1000 at home
and in the colonies, and is short H.
900 of this need, with nothing over
against aggression.
Russia needs 2s4.O0O internal and
has an additional 335.000 against ag-
gression.
Japan needs 256 900 internal and has
$1,000 additional against aggression.
The United States needs 286,000 in
ternal, but is $1,000 short Of this num-
Der.
Armed Strength Needed.
Thus, if only internal needs are
considered. the respective armies Of
the great powers would be as follows;
Gern1any-1l5000.
FTance-334 900.
Italy-86,O00.
Great Britain-390, 600.
RuSsia-284 600.
Japan-256, 900,
The United StateS-286 900.
These. roughly speaking, according
to the American plan, would be alb
solute needs. Reductions could there
fore be theoretically made right down
to this figure, provided other factors,
particularly the political factors, per-
mitted
1t is apparently an interesting
corollary of the American plan that in
equity. if the other powers feel obliged
to keep some supplement against ex-
ternal aggression beyond their needs
for internal order. Germany also might
reasonably ask for a similar supple
ment which, under the treaty Of
Versailles. is now denied it.
Germany is accordingly understood to
be favorable to the American plan. Italy
also is believed to be theoretically
favorable, though it may contest the
figures in the unofficial studies. Great
Britain. France, Japan and others want
more details before expressing them
selves.
Position of United States.
On the main question now formally
laid before the conference and discus
sion of which is scheduled to begin
April IL, the position Of the United
States is said 10 be as follows:
America believes that reduction will
have to be gradual in a series of treaties.
1t is ready to see certain weapons
abolished and others limited, both
directly and by the budgetary method.
1t believes in regional agreements,
assuming, however, that they will ex-
clude the United States because of its
relatively isolated geographical position.
1t thinks that lin tation should be
extended to trained reserves, though it
feels that each country should bt free
to choose its own military system.
1t has no objection to the interna-
tionaliZation of civil aviation regionally,
but it sees no reason why it should
apply to the United States.
1t favors the protection of civilian
populations against bombing and
gassing. and to this end America sug-
gests that the use of bombs and gas
should be restricted wholly against an
invader only in the territory which the
invader has wrongfully occupied
Finally, America is opposed to any
supervision over disarmament, except
by the exchange of information through
the Permanent Disarmament Com
mittee.
(Copyriobt 1879