Evening star., 1932-10-07
Navy Bargaining.

Norman H. Davis, able member OF
the American delegation to the Geneva
Disarmament Conference. IS in London
to confer with the British authorities
on matters Of mutual Anglo-American
interest, particularly in the field OF
naval armaments. When Geneva re-
cessed in July the conference had before
it as unfinished business the Hoover
proposal for fat all-around reduction
of one-third in armaments Of every
category. 1t was agreed that pending
the resumption of the Geneva discus
sions in 1888 there should be inter-
power negotiations designed to pave the
way to quicker decisions when the con-
ference swings back into session.
Fundamental differences persist be-
tween the American and British view
points on curtailment Of naval arma-
ments. The Washington Government
holds to the Hoover formula Of
direct cut in gross tonnage up to
thirty-three and a third per cent. The
London government proposes reduc-
tion in the size and gun -caliber OF bat
tleships and Of cruisers and smaller
aircraft carriers. The British thesis
was first projected at the abortive
Coolidge cruiser conference" at Geneva
in 1927. 1t was re-advocated at the
London Naval Conference in 1880. To
it the one-time mistress Of the seas
resolutely adheres.
On its face. the British proposal to
whittle down the dimensions OF permls-
sible warcraft would directly attain the
primary objective of disarmament, as
the United States itself has consistently
advocated. But the United States plea
for disarmament, as means OF reheV-
ing the backs of overburdened taxpay-
ers, has always been promised on the
theory that economy must not be
sought at the cost Of national safety.
In his speech of acceptance on August
IL President Hoover, whose zeal for
disarmament no one will challenge,
called for such a defensive establish
ment as would insure the security OF
the United States against invasion by
foreign soldiery.
United States naval experts point out
that this country requires 35,OOO-ton
battleshirs and 10,OO0-ton, 8-inch-gun
cruisers because of the wide radius OF
action the larger fuel-carrylng Ia
cilities of such ships permit to a navy
possessing no far-flung bases of supply
throughout the world. Great Britain
can afford to operate with 25,OOo-ton
battleships and 7,500-ton, 6-inch-gun
cruisers of shorter cruising radius, be-
cause, scattered over widely separated
strategic areas, her navy possesses fuel
bases. supply depots and repair docks.
The American Navy, deprived OF these
inestimably valuable advantages, would
be required to take the sea with float
ing fortresses." That is why the United
States needs bigger ships with higher
calibered guns than the British declare
they can get along with. These argu-
ments leave wholly out Of account an
other important factor in Britain S
favor-her possession OF supreme
merchant marine which overnight could
be turned into a fleet of swift armed
auxiliary cruisers.
The case is succinctly put by the
Chicago Tribune in an editorial en-
titled Navy Reduction at Uncle Sans
Expense" The Tribune says: Great
Britain possesses an unmatchable sys-
tenn of bases f1anking all the main lines
of traffic Her need is not tie larger
types capable of the longer sweep, but
a preponderance of numbers. But bat
tleships and large cruisers offset and
erdanger this preponderance. The
British policy Of reduction is to reduce
and limit types efficacious in American
circumstances, while permitting the
maintenance Of a maximum in types
efncient in British conditions. AS this
reduction is physically applied to both
navies, it has the appearance Of equal
ity, but the appearance is fraudulent.
1t is not necessary to go the length
of adopting the view that the British
formula is fraudulent" 1t is con-
ceived rather, 1t is fairer to believe, in
that spirit of self-interest which ever
characterizes British naval policy. Uncle
Sam would pay John Bull the best
compliment possible by emulating the
theory underlying British policy and
viewing naval reduction strictly from
the standpoint of what Is best for the
United States.