767.68119/691: Telegram
The Special Mission at Lausanne to the Secretary of State
[Received July 18—9:45 a.m.]
539. Our 538, July 17, 3 a.m. Final meetings this afternoon first, second and third committees. The topics of the protocol of evacuation, declaration of amnesty, Ottoman debt, and concession protocol were successively discussed.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
As final topic before first committee Rumbold read a statement in respect to immediate and complete application of the declaration of amnesty and the application of the same in respect to the Armenians. His statement was chiefly concerned with those other subjects who had supported the Allied occupation. The French and Italian delegates associated themselves with Rumbold’s statement and added a plea on behalf of the Armenians. When they had concluded their remarks, I made the following statement:
“We are at the close of a conference which it is confidently expected will inaugurate peace and cooperation throughout the Near East; the problem now under examination is the last problem to engage the [Page 1037] attention of the delegates. As such and also because it intimately affects many thousand[s] of people, the solution given to this problem will receive the widest public attention; it will acquire indeed a special significance and will serve to characterize the spirit and accomplishment of the conference in the minds of many persons who know little or nothing of the other difficult and intricate questions to which a suitable answer has been found. The present moment therefore calls for generosity, for an assuring expression which shall declare the spirit in which the new Turkish Government purposes to conduct its affairs.
His Excellency Ismet Pasha has spoken at a previous meeting of practical difficulties in the way of the constructive solution which it is so desirable should be found in the present case. Such difficulties may exist but I believe they can be examined and resolved in the light of the words which His Excellency himself spoke before this conference on December 13 last.
‘The Turkish delegation is firmly convinced that peace will bring about the disappearance of such causes of suffering as were of a political character, without prejudice to Turkey. Armenians will then be enabled to cooperate wholeheartedly in healing the wounds inflicted on them by the war. The Armenians who desire to remain in Turkey will be able to live in brotherhood with their Turkish compatriots who will be full of solicitude for them and will willingly forget the events of the past.’
My Government does not doubt that these words will be given the practical effect which it is but reasonable to expect, having in mind the representative character of the person who spoke them and the circumstances under which they were spoken.
Every problem has its solution. We urge that the solution of this problem be not delayed. We urge that Government of the Grand National Assembly, fully cognizant of the obligations no less than the privileges of its sovereignty, proceed without delay to a wise and tolerant adjustment which, having in mind the best interests of the Turkish States, shall at the same time give sympathetic consideration to the interests of these homeless exiles. And we urge that while this adjustment is in progress adequate measures be taken to safeguard the homes and property of all of its citizens without distinction of creed. The American Government and people have given practical and constructive evidence of their rightful interest in this problem and they, no less than the other nations here represented, will confidently expect equally practical and constructive measures on the part of the Government of the Grand National Assembly to remove this problem from the realm of international anxiety and concern.”
In response Ismet stated that Turkey would apply the amnesty provisions with the same promptness and sincerity as the other countries. He added that the Turkish delegation would adhere to desire of the Allies that it be put into effect at once and he guaranteed that Turkey would apply it sincerely. In respect to the Armenians he stated that the return of the Armenians who had left Turkey at different epochs was a wholly separate question from the amnesty provisions which concerned only persons now inhabiting [Page 1038] Turkey. The return of peaceable persons would not thereby be prevented although he refused any general engagement.
The meeting of the second committee followed immediately and was concerned chiefly with the question of the payment of coupons of the Ottoman debt. …
Meeting of the third committee followed. The delegates were asked to accept the protocol on concessions reported in my 538. Rumbold read a statement to the effect that although no mention was made of the Turkish Petroleum Company, none the less he desired on behalf of his Government to assert categorically that the British Government maintained the rights acquired by that company by agreement with the Ottoman Government in 1914. He described Ismet’s alleged acceptance of this in principle and his refusal later to accept any formula in that connection. Ismet replied that the rights of this company constituted a judicable question and added that he had qualified his original acceptance with the statement that he must refer it to his Government. He added that his later suggestion was that the question be referred to arbitration and that this final declaration of the British Government did not engage Turkey in any way in the future. At this point I made the following statement:
“I do not consider it necessary to make a detailed statement in this connection. I may, however, express the gratification of my Government that a way has been found to solve the difficult question of concessions. As regards the provisions of the protocol affecting the Régie Générale and the Vickers-Armstrong Company, I take it for granted that these provisions will not be applied in such a way as to prejudice vested rights of American citizens or companies. As regards the rights said to have been acquired by the Turkish Petroleum Company before the war I deem it sufficient to refer to the correspondence with the British Government during the past three years in which my Government has fully set forth its point of view [which] has not changed.”
In his reply Rumbold did not accept the suggestion of arbitration and concluded with the remark that he did not understand why a third party should interfere in a dispute between the Ottoman Government and a British company.
The Japanese delegate thereupon made a brief statement of the application of the principle of the Open Door to Turkey despite the fact that his Government had no interest in concessions in that country. The discussion of concessions stopped here.
Some congratulatory remarks were made by the several delegates and I made the following statement:
“The successful conclusion of the Lausanne Conference has now been achieved. It is too early doubtless and we are too close to the stress and turmoil of negotiation to value the result secured at its true worth in all its many beneficial aspects. But we need feel no [Page 1039] hesitation in describing this result as momentous. A long period of warfare and disturbance affecting the whole of the Near East has been brought to a close; the problems of great difficulty and intricacy have been solved through the patience, moderation, and the conciliatory spirit of the delegations; we can now look forward with confidence to the coming period of reconstruction when the ideals of peace and tolerance which have inspired the deliberations of the conference will receive a long and fruitful application.
The United States welcomes today’s achievement and on behalf of my Government I have the honor to express to the delegations here assembled sincere congratulations upon the successful outcome of their labors.”
Repeated to Constantinople.