no images were found

2903 Grindon Avenue Baltimore, MD 21214 | Office: 410-377-0500

angies-list-logo angies-list-logo

Washington Naval Agreement

His opinion was made by Katé Kanji, the president of the Naval Staff College, who was his first marine in the delegation and who represented the influential “Great Navy”, which was that in the event of war, the United States would be able to build more warships indefinitely because of their enormous industrial power, and Japan had to prepare as deeply as possible for the inevitable conflict with America. [Citation required] The Washington conference understood the global demand for peace and disarmament. Without them, the United States, Britain and Japan would have built expensively, each fearing that the other two would be too powerful. But even with the restrictions, the agreement consolidated Japan`s position as a major power; it achieved parity with the two world`s major navies in the Pacific, was allowed to maintain a greater naval power than France and Italy and was treated as a colonial power with equal diplomatic interests, a first for a non-Western nation. [12] The agreements forced the United States to dismantle 15 old and 2 new battleships and 13 vessels under construction. The intention to terminate the Maritime Treaty of Washington on 31 December 1936 is expected by the Japanese government before the end of the current year. The 1930 London Maritime Treaty expires on 31 December 1936 in the statute of limitations. In accordance with the treaty, the major maritime powers will hold a conference in 1935 to consider a further limitation of naval armament through international agreements. Preliminary diplomatic talks, now being held in London, have revealed Japan`s clear determination not to sign a new maritime treaty that does not grant it equal status with Britain and the United States. Given that this country, and probably Britain, are not prepared to grant this concession, the prospect of a successful conclusion of the negotiations next year is now considered doubtful. The British, however, were more cautious and moderate.

Indeed, British officials presented some general wishes at the conference: to achieve peace and stability in the Western Pacific; Avoid a sea-arms race with the United States; to thwart Japanese intrusion into areas under their influence; and to preserve the security of the countries of Singapore, Hong Kong and the Dominion, but they did not participate in the conference with a special list of demands. On the contrary, they have provided a vague idea of what the Western Pacific should be after an agreement. The Four-Powers Pact, signed on 13 December 1921 by the United States, Great Britain, Japan and France, provided that all signatories be consulted in the event of controversy between two of them on “any peaceful matter”. An accompanying agreement indicated that they would respect each other`s rights with respect to the various Pacific islands and the mandates they held. These agreements have ensured that there is a framework for consultation between the United States, Great Britain and Japan, the three major powers whose interests in the Pacific are most likely to lead to conflict between them. But the agreements were formulated too vaguely to have a binding effect, and their main reason was that they lifted the Anglo-Japanese alliance (1902; renewed in 1911), which was previously one of the most important means of maintaining a balance of power in East Asia.

inspection and cleanup image