"I do not hesitate to say that the limitation on naval craft between the great naval powers was too high"
About this Quote
Kellogg’s sentence has the dry chill of a diplomatic postmortem: an official admitting, in carefully fenced language, that the numbers everyone agreed to were never actually meant to restrain anyone. “I do not hesitate” is performative courage, the kind that appears only after the consequences are already in motion. He frames the critique as a matter of calibration, not principle. The problem isn’t naval limitation; it’s that the ceiling was “too high.” That phrasing lets him sound like a realist without picking a fight with the entire arms-control project.
The context is the interwar arms-limitation regime - Washington and London naval treaties, conference-room attempts to prevent a replay of World War I by rationing dreadnoughts and tonnage. Kellogg, best known for the Kellogg-Briand Pact renouncing war, lived inside the era’s central contradiction: the desire to ban catastrophe while leaving intact the machinery that made catastrophe possible. His line quietly acknowledges the loophole logic of these deals. If the cap sits above what states already plan to build, it’s not restraint; it’s an alibi.
The subtext is domestic and international at once. At home, he signals sobriety to voters and senators wary of militarism but anxious about security. Abroad, he hints that rivals will exploit permissive limits, turning “cooperation” into a race conducted within politely agreed lanes. It’s an indictment delivered in accountant’s prose: the treaty didn’t fail because ideals are naive, but because the math was.
The context is the interwar arms-limitation regime - Washington and London naval treaties, conference-room attempts to prevent a replay of World War I by rationing dreadnoughts and tonnage. Kellogg, best known for the Kellogg-Briand Pact renouncing war, lived inside the era’s central contradiction: the desire to ban catastrophe while leaving intact the machinery that made catastrophe possible. His line quietly acknowledges the loophole logic of these deals. If the cap sits above what states already plan to build, it’s not restraint; it’s an alibi.
The subtext is domestic and international at once. At home, he signals sobriety to voters and senators wary of militarism but anxious about security. Abroad, he hints that rivals will exploit permissive limits, turning “cooperation” into a race conducted within politely agreed lanes. It’s an indictment delivered in accountant’s prose: the treaty didn’t fail because ideals are naive, but because the math was.
Quote Details
| Topic | War |
|---|---|
| Source | Help us find the source |
More Quotes by Frank
Add to List


