711.672/132: Telegram
The Special Mission at Lausanne to the Secretary of State
[Received 1:14 p.m.]
555. Referring to Mission’s 554. Ismet suggested during conversation last night that we might sign a general treaty and an extradition treaty, supplementing them by an exchange of letters in which the question of claims could be treated separately. It had been [Page 1121] already suggested to us informally by one of the Turkish experts that the most promising course would be to sign the treaties, upon an understanding that they will be presented to our respective Governments for ratification only if accompanied by a claims convention to be negotiated within the next few weeks. This would give undesirable emphasis to the economic aspect of our negotiations; but if the understanding on the claims convention can be made binding, and if it is perfectly clear that the treaties actually signed are accepted conditionally, our legal position should remain unimpaired. It is possible that eventually we may have presented to us the alternative of consenting to an arrangement of this sort or abandoning our present tentative agreements. In case the Department might be ultimately disposed to assent to some such proposal there are two possible ways to give it effect:
- (1)
- By an article in the treaty declaring that the question of claims is reserved for a subsequent convention which will accompany the general treaty when submitted for ratification.
- (2)
- By omitting the claims article from the treaty but supplementing it by an exchange of notes expressly setting forth the understanding that an agreement on claims must be reached before the treaty will be submitted for ratification.
We request instructions.