The naval ratio proposed by each country is basically based on its own interests, even if it is the naval ratio of Australasia, in fact, it is a proposal to strengthen Britain and France and themselves, and to maintain the gap between Britain and the United States, as well as the gap between Australasia and the island countries.

Although the countries clearly know that the ratio they are proposing is not reasonable, it is really related to their own national interests, and these diplomats have no other merits, and they are really thick-skinned and refuse to make the slightest concession.

This also made the talks last for more than half a month, and finally Britain and the United States proposed a killer Cambodia to intimidate the island countries that refused to give in to the naval ratio: "If the island countries continue to hold on, for every capital warship built by the island countries, Britain and the United States will build four." ”

Such a threat is not an exaggeration, and Britain's naval investment is enormous, and it is able to maintain naval superiority over Germany, let alone a small island nation.

At present, all the developments of the island countries are sponsored by the United States, and it is almost impossible for the island countries to confront the United States in terms of funding.

After the dispute on the island side is resolved, the most important issue at present is the ratio of the naval forces of the United States and the United Kingdom.

On this dispute, the United States and island nations support the United States in the same proportion as the United Kingdom, and the United Kingdom and Australasia support the United Kingdom slightly more than the United States.

This also makes the next French opinion more important. Countries began to woo the French delegates and put forward their own conditions.

At the end of November, negotiations between the countries were still at a stalemate.

At this time, the British delegates approached the French delegates and tried to win their support.

After taking a sip of the red wine produced in France, the British representative Thomas smiled and said: "Mr. Tirek, the British Empire needs the support of your country, for the sake of the friendship between Britain and France, please do not hesitate to help." ”

The French representative Tirek did not respond directly, but changed the subject: "The British Empire is the most powerful country in the world, and even a major crisis as the Irish War of Independence can be easily resolved, so how can it need the help of France?" ”

There is no doubt that Tirek only cared about what Thomas could offer, and he was even more sneering at Thomas's Anglo-French friendship.

Although Britain and France did cooperate closely in World War I, in the history of Britain and France, the relationship between Britain and France was much less than the time of war, and Britain and France were real neighbors with centuries-old roots, and the relationship was not much better than that between France and Germany.

Compared with the Anglo-French relationship, perhaps the Franco-American relationship is more intimate. After all, France at that time single-handedly promoted the independence of the United States, and without the support of the French, the 13 colonies of the United States at that time would be far from being a match for Britain.

If the relationship between the British Empire and Australasia is somewhat similar to that of mother and son, then the relationship between France and the United States is similar to that of father and son, but the Americans do not agree.

"France is still strong, and I believe that this Moroccan crisis will be resolved soon, and Madame Ree may be able to withstand the attack of the Spanish army, but she will definitely not be able to withstand the attack of the French army." British representative Thomas said with a smile.

Although there is no open promise, Thomas and Tirek, who are veteran diplomats, naturally understand the meaning of these words.

It was not so much that the British Empire believed that France would be able to resolve the Moroccan crisis quickly, but that it supported France in resolving the Moroccan crisis.

This was also one of the conditions offered by the British, supporting the French to quickly pacify Morocco and avoid a war of attrition.

"You know, Mr. Thomas. France is one of the most powerful countries in the world, and we deserve more of the proportional distribution of our navy. In view of the damage to France, we agree to the same proportion as Australasia, but in no way allow the island nation to exceed or equal the proportion to France. Representative Tirek smiled and said his second condition.

France was a top power before World War I, and after World War I, it had opened a gap with Britain and the United States.

In addition to fighting for their own interests, each country is also fighting for a little face for itself.

If the proportion of French people is equal to that of island nations, what does this make tens of millions of French think? Isn't it an insult to France, the hegemon of Europe, that an island country that was a backward country a few decades ago, has climbed on the head of France in a short period of time?

Especially after the First World War, the French considered themselves to be the most powerful country on the continent, but they would not allow France to be even lower than the island nation.

As for Australasia, although it is also a country that has only risen in a short period of time, after all, most of its citizens are made up of Europeans, and it is not so shameful to be evaluated by Europeans.

What's more, the United States and island countries do not support France's naval ratio exceeding that of island countries, but in the naval ratio proposed by Australasia, France's proportion is greater than that of island countries.

It is already clear which side is more in their own interests than the two, and the French naturally do not mind huddling with Australasia for warmth.

"Well, it's nature. Regardless of the rest, France is also the most powerful country on the European continent and deserves to have a navy that far exceeds that of the island nation. Europe is still the most developed region in the world, and there is no place for a wild country like an island country to compare with us. Thomas nodded, agreeing to the Frenchman's proposal.

If the French can be used to support themselves, then the ratio of the five navies will be that of the United Kingdom > the United States > France = Australasia > island countries.

Even if France's naval ratio was increased, it would not be possible to threaten Britain's naval position at all.

On the contrary, France supported Britain and made the naval ratio of the island nation the lowest among all countries, and naturally it would be hated by the island nation.

Putting the French on the opposite side of the island nation is equivalent to standing on the opposite side of the United States, which is beneficial for the strategic interests of the British.

In the midst of the conversation and laughter of the two deputies, a ratio of naval tonnage sufficient to determine the situation in the world was also determined.

At the next day's meeting, France uncharacteristically supported the British and Australasian proposals.

It also caught the United States and the island nation off guard, and in the event of a disadvantage, they eventually had to make further compromises.

In the end, it took more than a month to finally have a preliminary framework for the proportion of the size of the navies of the five countries.

Britain still gained a slight advantage over the United States, and the tonnage of capital ships was limited to 600,000 tons.

The United States followed, and the tonnage of capital ships was limited to 550,000 tons.

Next is France and Australasia, each with 350,000 tons of capital warship tonnage.

The least is the ambitious island nation, the tonnage of the main warship is limited to 300,000 tons, but the gap with France and Australasia is not too huge.

This was also the result of mutual compromise, and although Britain maintained superiority over the United States, Australasia, and France over the island nations, the superiority was limited to 50,000 tons, that is, the tonnage of a capital warship.

If there is only one difference in the strength of the main warship, the difference in the strength of the navy is not so great, and there is still hope for a fight to turn a bicycle into a motorcycle.

After the naval ratio of these five more important countries was determined, only the naval division of Italy remained.

The Italian government demanded a sky-high price and directly issued a request of 350,000 tons, which was naturally rejected by the five countries.

Jokes aside, such a naval tonnage is a compromise that took the five most powerful countries more than a month to come to, and naturally it is impossible for a country like Italy to shake it.

After some bargaining, the Italians' naval tonnage was limited to 175,000 tons, directly cutting the Italians' demands in half, reflecting the domineering spirit of the five countries united.

Together with Italy's naval tonnage, the naval tonnage of these six countries already determines the naval tonnage of countries around the world.

Because no other country could pose a threat to these countries in terms of navy, Germany and Austria-Hungary were limited in naval development, and Russia was too busy with the civil war to develop its navy, so naturally there was no need to limit it accordingly.

However, this does not mean that the Naval Limitation Treaty has been formalized.

In addition to the restrictions on the main warships, various auxiliary warships, including submarines, became the focus of the next discussion.

Because of the impact of World War I, the British were very afraid of submarines from other countries.

This is no joke, during the First World War, the elusive German submarines made British warships and merchant ships suffer enough, and this has also become an unforgettable memory of the British Navy.

But it is clear that other countries have different opinions on the development of submarines.

Submarines can pose a huge threat to some warships, and they are also the only means of resistance of countries with relatively weak navies against naval powers.

If submarines are banned, it will be equivalent to dashing the hope of a weak navy country to resist a strong navy, which many countries do not want to see.

In particular, the island countries have the smallest navy among all countries, so they naturally do not agree with Britain's proposal to completely ban the development of naval submarines.

It also brought the naval limitation treaty, which should have been reached quickly, into a period of stagnation, and the negotiation of small and medium-sized warships and submarines could not be completed without a few months of effort.

This is a good thing for Australasia. Because the construction of the three R108 battleships has entered the final stage, it is expected to be completed within half a year, and the official launch test will be carried out.

As long as it can be delayed for another half a year, the three battleships in Australasia can be completed before the signing of the Naval Limitation Treaty, which is not a violation of the Naval Limitation Treaty.

In order to give the shipyard enough time, Australasian diplomatic representatives received instructions from Arthur to join the debate over small and medium-sized warships and submarines, and to muddy the waters as much as possible to keep the countries bickering for longer.

The good news is that the maximum standard displacement of a single capital warship, as well as the total tonnage limit for aircraft carriers, will need to be negotiated, which will also delay the conclusion of the naval limitation treaty again, and in general, not only meet Arthur's requirements, but may even exceed expectations.

However, a subsidiary treaty was quickly finalized.

This subsidiary treaty has nothing to do with the size of each country's navy, but only with the fortifications on the islands occupied by the countries in the Pacific.

It is stipulated that in addition to the de jure territory of various countries, other Pacific islands are not allowed to build new naval bases and fortresses, so as to reduce conflicts and contradictions between countries in the Pacific region.

Good news for Australasia, because the division of military districts in Australasia has long been completed, the naval base has long been built, and this subsidiary treaty has no effect.

3200 words for the second update, ask for a monthly pass, ask for support!

Today continues to be 10,000 per day, has been changed to 6200/10000, ask for a monthly pass, ask for support!

(End of chapter)