Naval Historywith Dr. Alex

Q&A · 56:52-57:36

Why an 8:5:3 treaty ratio shifts insecurity

Giving Britain a larger ratio would ease Japanese insecurity only by making Britain and the United States feel vulnerable.

Japanese NavyNaval Arms RaceRoyal NavyUS NavyWashington Naval Treaty
Watch at this timeFull video guide
Question

Would an 8:5:3 Washington treaty ratio for Britain, the United States, and Japan be better?

Short answer

No; it would replace Japanese insecurity with British and American insecurity rather than stabilize the system.

Notes

The central problem with the historical ratio was the insecurity it created in Japan. An 8:5:3 arrangement would transfer that fear to Britain and the United States rather than produce a stable settlement. A treaty cannot create stability by moving strategic anxiety from one participant to another. Its ratios have to be judged against the security expectations of every signatory, not as abstract numbers alone.