How national priorities shape treaty battleships

What capital-ship programmes would Britain, the United States, and Japan pursue under the equitable treaty?

Britain would likely favour fast ships and steady construction, the United States might trade speed for cost and protection, and Japan would wait to tailor its response.

A detailed viewer proposal reaches a result similar to the answer, though it follows a different line of reasoning. It begins with a British programme of 28-to-30-knot fast battleships that keeps shipyards working and signals commitment to the treaty. American naval planners might prefer a slower South Dakota-style ship because Congress could favour lower cost and greater protection over speed, while Japan has an incentive to wait, observe both programmes, and use its full allowance for a clean-sheet response with heavy firepower. The guns-armour-speed triangle is filtered through employment, legislative politics, industrial timing, and national strategy rather than tonnage alone.