British treaty practice relied on favorable allowances

Why does British naval-treaty practice sometimes look like cheating?

Because Britain often negotiated useful allowances into the rules, making self-serving conduct technically compliant rather than a straightforward treaty violation.

The question cites County-class displacement and the handling of guns removed from Courageous as examples of apparently evasive British practice. Britain often shaped treaty rules around its own requirements, making favorable allowances part of the signed agreement. Conduct can then appear dishonest while remaining technically within the negotiated text. Rule-writing power, enforcement, and secret violation are different mechanisms in arms control. This is a broad interpretation rather than a legal audit of the two examples.