Later negotiations would remain difficult, but satisfaction with the Washington settlement would create more room for trades over destroyers, carriers, cruisers, and capital ships. Britain historically exchanged heavy-cruiser for light-cruiser tonnage and also pursued restrictions on submarines. The submarine was compared to a threat that could turn the whole sea into a jungle, disrupting British plans even while Britain invested heavily in anti-submarine warfare. France and Italy's earlier exchange of battlecruiser capacity for battleship tonnage provides a model for similar bargaining. A Washington settlement seen as successful could make London a continuation of an accepted order rather than a struggle to repair a failed one. That continuity might preserve restraint even while individual categories and national priorities changed.
Notable Point · 1:13:01-1:15:14
Could a stronger Washington settlement improve London?
If the Washington settlement left participants more satisfied, the London Naval Treaty might continue its bargains instead of reopening so many sources of friction.