The closing argument is that a rule should be enforceable and should make sense to follow. Every treaty navy found ways around displacement restrictions, including British treatment of water and armour weights as well as American, Japanese, and Italian practices, though methods and degree varied. Once governments misstate their own ships, they expect rivals to do the same, weakening the trust on which arms control depends. A realistic 41,000-ton standard might also reduce the advantage of pursuing a Bismarck-like oversized design, even if Japan still chose a super-battleship route. A higher limit would not eliminate competition, but it could make truthful compliance less strategically irrational.
Notable Point · 1:09:14-1:12:20
The danger of unenforceable naval limits
Limits that produce unsafe or impractical ships invite evasion, secrecy, and distrust - an institutional weakness in treaty arms control.