711.672/144a: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Special Mission at Lausanne
269. 1. The Department has considered again the Turkish proposal regarding claims as reported in Mission’s 503 of July 6. It has had in mind the possibility of including in the treaty a variation of the proposed formula as an arrangement preferable to a postponement of the settlement of claims. (See Mission’s 555 of July 25, and Department’s 264 of July 25.)
2. It does not seem desirable that claims arising before 1917 should be distinguished from those arising after that date, since there has been no satisfactory settlement of many of the claims originating in the earlier period. Accordingly, all of paragraph A of Mission’s 503 should be dropped, and Department would accept in the treaty a modification of paragraph B somewhat as follows: That claims against the United States or against Turkey shall be filed with the competent authorities of the respective Governments within a year from the time the treaty goes into force and upon application of the interested Governments, and that evidence shall be furnished of the nature, origin, and grounds of the claims. Two commissioners, one appointed by the United States Government and one by the [Page 1128] Turkish Government, shall inquire into the claims within a year and a half from the time the treaty comes into force, with the object of arriving at a friendly settlement. If a settlement of individual claims cannot be reached, a convenient method of dealing with the residue of unsettled claims shall be agreed upon promptly between the two Governments.
3. The advantage which such a clause would have over the formula suggested in Mission’s 555 would be that we would not thereby incur delay in obtaining ratification and that on the other hand Turkey would put itself under treaty obligation to concert with us some means of settling claims which we had been unable to settle by direct agreement.
4. Should the formula suggested in Mission’s 551 of July 22 be rejected by the Turks, it is left to your discretion whether to propose a formula on the lines of the previous paragraph. You could then hold in reserve the procedure you have outlined in Mission’s 555, resorting to it in case the negotiations are in danger of a rupture.