The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1934-08-04
JAPAN AND THE NAVY

Japan does not like Secretary Swanson's
- proposal for naval reduction. according
to the cables. That is surprising. For sew
eraI reasons:
/. Premier Keisuke Okada himself has just
been talking reduction.
?. A naval race is expensive business, for
each and all.
3. Japan is less able. even that the United
states and Great Britain. to afford mounting
armament expenses.
4 Japan needs very much a friendly agree
ment with the United States and Great
Britain. who seem to be standing fairly well
together on this matter.
So Japan's reported policy, however illog-
ical it may appear from the standpoint Of
world friendship. seems even more illogical
from the viewpoint Of her own selfish interest.
But the subject can not be dropped there
permitting our two nations to drift into dis
agreement. We Americans owe it to ourselves
and TO world peace TO make every effort to
understand Japans feeling.
II Japan can not accept our original pro-
posal for aIl-round one-third reduction. or
the new Swanson figure OF 20 per cent reduc-
ton. Toxic Is free to make a counter proposal.
o. course nothing could be accomplished by
repeating her 1892 Geneva proposal for cut
ting or navy "a per cent while she cuts only
per cent; or the recent trial balloon for an
American cut Of A per cent and japanese
OF Q per cent. Such tests only increase fric-
ton. The counter-ofer should be serious
enough 10 merit serious consideration by
Washington.
Apparently Japans real purpose is TO
change The 5-5-3 ratio which she accepted with
Britain and America in the Washington treaty.
There Is nothing sacred about that figure.
Possibly some modification might be fair
that Is not a question on which the general
American public would be apt TO have an
opinion. il Is too technical.
But the American public gives no sign Of
changing its opinion as to the purpose which
fixed the 5-5-3 ratio in the first place. The
object was 10 prevent either Japan or the
United States from having an offensive force
against the other And it is agreed rather
generally By naval authorities that under the
5-5-3 ratio Japan in her own waters and
near her own bases. has been superior TO any
hve-ratio foreign power. II Japan can show
that. because Of changing naval conditions.
modification Of the 5-5-3 ratio is necessary
TO preserve the purely defense balance. then
she deserves g fair hearing.
Often It Is suggested that the main diff
Guilty IS national pride That was a foreign
Interpretation OF Tokio's recent statement
that Japan VIII demand equality but not
parity" There must be something wrong
with our diplomacy If We unwittingly have
encouraged the japanese TO believe that
smaller naval ratio is sign Of national in
ferio7ty. We ought 70 be able 70 make them
see that naval requirements are relative. and
that what may be a small navy for one nation
might be a very large navy for another nation
Certainly Japan does not think that France
and italy are inferior. or consider themselves
inferior. because they need and accept smaller
ratios than Great Britain and the United
States.
So even the national pride difficulty may be
solved II both SIDES Try hard enough.