711.672/146: Telegram
The Special Mission at Lausanne to the Secretary of State
[Received July 30—9:50 a.m.]
569. Last night I received a call from Ismet Pasha accompanied by Riza Nour Bey. He regretted that since our last interview there had been a lapse of four days, and explained that the delay was owing to the present situation in Turkey, and that his Government had not yet sent him definite instructions in regard to the proposals I had made for claims settlements. (See Mission’s 557, July 25.) He had corresponded with Angora, however, on the subject of our claims, and had received a request for more particular information. He said that his Government earnestly desired to reach an agreement, and had no thought of refusing to satisfy just claims. But for the past decade Turkish territory had suffered from wars, tumults, and devastations, and he said that the Turkish Government could not be held responsible for the losses which had ensued. With this consideration in mind he had himself drafted a formula, which was quite unofficial, however, and which implied no obligations since he had not yet asked for his Government’s approval of it. He said it was an attempt to meet the requirements of our position. Appended to this telegram is the text of the informal note. Turlington has discussed it with Mustafa Cherif Bey and Munir Bey, and after considering their explanations [Page 1129] I went to see Ismet again today and advised him that there seemed to be no satisfactory basis for negotiation in his formula. On receiving my statement Ismet replied that it was quite impossible for him to consent to arbitrate claims the nature of which was unknown, and that at the bottom of the difficulty was his Government’s unwillingness to take a leap in the dark. In his opinion it remained for us to choose between two courses: Either to put off signing the treaty until the Turkish Government had received, examined, and classified the claims; or else to sign at once and reserve the question of claims for an amicable solution after the two Governments had restored normal relations. Of these alternatives, he said, his Government would prefer the second. I replied that the only course open to me was to refer his proposal to the Department, although I feared that the Turkish attitude would create an unfavorable impression.
It did not seem wise to let Ismet know at once that the Department had authorized me to assent to postponement, since I have heretofore persistently held out for the arbitration of claims of all classes. But it is the unanimous opinion of the Mission that there is no longer any chance that the formula contained in Mission’s 551, July 22, can be used as a basis of settlement. I cautiously put forward the idea of the payment of a lump sum, but I saw at once that Ismet would not for a moment consider it and that to propose terms on that basis would be futile.
My intention is, therefore, to propose next the formula indicated in Department’s 269, July 27, as I have been authorized to do. Our unanimous opinion is that we cannot obtain better terms and that to prolong the discussions would be to imperil the signing of the treaty. Munir and Mustafa Cherif, in their conversations with our expert, have expressed views similar to Ismet’s. We have had fresh intimations that Ismet has in view an early departure. We have heard that his Government has expressly summoned him to Angora. There is some confirmation of the rumor in the fact that at my last two conversations with Ismet he has been accompanied for the first time by Riza Nour Bey, the second Turkish delegate. This seems to signify that in case of Ismet’s departure our negotiations may be conducted by Riza Nour. Ismet may make the plea of urgent political necessity to explain his return to Angora. I believe, however, that if there is any prospect of an early agreement he will remain here. It is conceivable that he is trying to stampede us into a hasty decision; nevertheless, it is our belief that in the matter of claims he does not intend and he will not be permitted to yield. During the conference he seldom if ever resorted to ruses to gain his ends, and we do not think that he is now attempting to practice any deception, or that we have anything to gain by insisting that all claims shall be arbitrated. [Page 1130] We do believe, on the contrary, that to persist in that contention will imperil the signature of our treaty in Lausanne. Accordingly, after the Department has considered a report which we are about to send on the draft of the whole treaty as it now stands, it may desire us to sign at once.
The following is Ismet’s provisional formula on claims:4
“The claims of American nationals, companies, or associations shall within six months from the coming into force of the present treaty be presented for registration to the competent Turkish authorities in Constantinople. They shall be accompanied by all the evidence establishing their character, origin, or justification.
Those of the claims above referred to, the legitimacy of which may be contested by Turkey or which may be regarded by it as not involving its responsibility, as well as any divergence relative to the amounts to be paid, shall be settled by arbitration.
The provisions of the present protocol do not apply to claims arising from cases which are not dependent upon the volition or power of the Turkish Government, such as acts of war, revolt, and insurrection, or from military or administrative measures which such cases caused to be taken, or finally from the exercise by Turkey of its sovereign rights or duties in like manner as any independent state. Such claims may not be presented to the Turkish Government.”
- Formula not paraphrased.↩