The agreement assigned Japan a smaller capital-ship allowance than Britain or the United States. The comparison here is between the agreed 5:5:3 ratio and a Japanese preference for seven to ten against either larger navy. In this interpretation, the lower allocation heightened Japanese insecurity even though the United States achieved the spending reductions it sought. On that reasoning, an economy measure could have consequences for how another government assessed its safety. This is an argument about perceived security and the settlement's possible effects, without making Japan's later decisions inevitable.
Notable Point · 3:28:34-3:29:28
The 5:5:3 ratio: economy for some, insecurity for Japan
The closing argument links Japan's preferred 7:10 relationship to concern about the lower allocation under the 5:5:3 settlement.