IMPERIAL DEFENCE AND SINGAPORE.
[To the Editor of the SPECTATOR.] SIR,—In your issue Of April 19th you commented on my letter re Singapore. You claim that I admit that a naval base for capital ships would be a challenge to Japan. It is simply the assertion of our right to defend ourselves against a Power which is expanding in ability to attack commerce more intensively than ever Germany did in the days when you and I were urging preparedness. If the Japanese fleet did not exist there would be no need for preparedness in the Pacific, as a war with the United States, whose whole fleet is being concentrated in the Pacific, is unthinkable. You next say the only large modern warship that has ever passed through the canal is the ' Renown.' This is an error, for the ' Ramillies' went through the canal. You say " it was an operation of considerable difficulty." There I differ, but the important point is the future, and the canal is to be 200 feet wide, and 140 feet of this is to have a depth of over 42 feet. Bends are being modified, and the largest of vessels will shortly be able to use the canal without being lightened in any way, and at the same time proceed at a fair rate of speed.
As for the menace of au attack by land on a fleet passing through the canal, it is obvious that such a matter was con- sidered by the successive Governments, Defence Committees and War Staffs which were unanimous as to a Pacific Fleet and Singapore. As to a couple of submarines at one end of the Suez Canal putting the whole fleet in jeopardy, I can only express my astonishment at the ease with which such asser- tions are made in regard to war matters and in others. Apart from the inference that the great naval War Staff, including Lord Beatty and Sir Roger Keyes, to put it mildly, do not know their business, two comments may be made. The chart of the North Sea is black with the courses of the Grand Fleet in the War, and the whole German submarine fleet effected nothing against them. There is also the fact officially stated that the power of the offensive against submarines since the War has increased in greater ratio than the power of submarines. I do not even recognize any danger whatsoever, though incidentally I may mention that the depths near the entrance to the Canal are unsuitable for submergence of submarines.
Finally, there is the question you raise of the supply of the fleet at Singapore taxing " the resources of the Fourth Sea Lord to their utmost." That officer is, of course, a party to the unanimous opinions of the Board of Admiralty, that Singapore's naval base is vital to the safety of our Empire and
trade in a war with Japan, because without the base the fleet cannot function. We had to arrange in the late War for the feeding of our islands, and of great armies in Europe and elsewhere. To feed a fleet at Singapore will be a light task by comparison.—I am, Sir, &c.,
CARLYON BELLAIRS.
Previous page
