Minister Grey also invited Arthur, who naturally agreed and promised to attend this year's Entente Powers Conference.
The location of the Entente Powers Conference, which was held since 1911, has certain political implications.
The first Entente Powers Conference was held in London, United Kingdom. As the core of the Entente Powers, it was justifiable to host the conference in London.
The previous year's conference, the one in 1912, was held in Paris, France.
France serves as a bulwark against Germany, bearing the brunt of Germany's military pressure.
Therefore, hosting the second Entente Powers Conference in Paris, France, not only highlighted France's status as the second-strongest nation in the alliance, but also reassured the French people that Britain and Russia would stand united behind France.
By convention, this year's conference should have taken place in Saint Petersburg, Russia, as it is the due treatment for Russia as the third major power in the alliance.
Even if the United States is stronger than Australasia, it cannot gain the approval of Britain and France without participating in the war at the beginning of World War I.
Arthur initially planned to adopt the American approach by selling armaments to both parties during the early stages of the war, and then join the advantaged side in the middle or latter stages to put an end to the battle.
However, after conversations with Prime Minister Kent and Butler Kent, Arthur finally saw things clearly.
If Australasia adopted the same strategy as the United States, the United States would undoubtedly have a greater advantage due to its more developed economy and industry.
In this case, Australasia would not be able to stop the rise of the United States and may lose the trust of the British government and people after the war due to its support for Germany during the early stages of the conflict.
However, if Australasia enters the war at its beginning and participates in the world war as one of the Four Great Powers of the Entente, its status and position would be significantly different.
Compared to the United States, which seeks to profit in the early stages of the war and seize benefits in the middle and later stages, it is evident that Australasia is considered more of an "insider" by Britain and France.
Additionally, given the British government's existing wariness towards the United States, it remains to be seen whether the United States can obtain the enormous profits and benefits it gained historically from World War I, depending on not only Australasia's consent but also whether the British and French governments are naive enough to fall for it.