467.11 W 89/37: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the High Commissioner at Constantinople ( Bristol )
214. 1. From your telegram 293 of November 8, it appears that the Turkish negotiators are taking the same line of argument which at Lausanne prevented the reaching of an agreement on claims. If we accepted the contention that Turkey is not to be held responsible for claims arising from war and insurrection, it might open the door to the elimination of many claims which are well founded. Furthermore, there does not seem to be any satisfactory basis for settlement or even for further negotiations in the suggestion that claimants for requisitions should submit their receipts to local authorities for settlement, that Turkish tribunals should handle the cases of loss arising from acts of private individuals, and that the other claims should be dealt with through the regular channels of diplomacy.
2. The only hopeful element in the situation is your statement that the Turks are willing to undertake the benevolent examination of specific claims which may be submitted and that in principle they are not opposed to the submission of certain classes of claims to arbitration. The desirable procedure would appear to be to follow up these points and try to induce the Turks to give up their attempt to qualify their consent by insisting that certain broad classes of claims be excluded.
3. The Department finds it difficult to understand why the Turks object to the submission of claims to impartial arbitration. Turkey has given a good deal of emphasis to her desire to deal with other nations in accord with the recognized principles of international law and on a basis of perfect equality. Upon this basis Turkey has negotiated with the Allies and the United States. However, Turkey seems to expect quite a different test to be applied now that the question arises as to how she will meet her own obligations. In view of the fact that the principle that international claims should be submitted to an impartial arbitration is so generally accepted and practiced, the Turkish attitude on this question is an unwelcome and an almost unique exception. The United States, as you know, recently has negotiated agreements with Germany and Mexico for the arbitration of claims.
4. The American Government does not wish to press claims for which the Turkish Government could not be held justly responsible. The Department also appreciates the difficult condition of Turkish finances and would be willing to enter into a liberal agreement with the Turkish Government concerning the time for paying the awards.
[Page 1182]5. Indicating that you are acting under instructions from the Department you should present the views set forth in the two preceding paragraphs and learn the attitude of the Turkish negotiators in further detail toward the submission to impartial arbitration of all claims questions, including (a) classes of claims, (b) the merits of specific claims, (c) the extent to which Turkey is liable, in view of the territory which she has lost. You should also ask whether the Turks wish to make any suggestions regarding the form of arbitration or the manner in which an arbitrator might possibly be selected.
6. The Department thinks that the questions at issue might be narrowed down by action along the above lines. More and more the Department is becoming convinced that it will be useless to prolong the discussion of claims unless we can obtain some effective plan for arbitration. It is realized, however, that you are facing peculiar difficulties in negotiating at the present time due to the sensitiveness of the Turks and to the fact that they are ignorant of our claims and possibly exaggerate them. The Department would therefore hesitate to believe that the mature and settled views of the Turks on this question are represented by their present attitude. The Department feels that the Turks would be prepared to take a more reasonable attitude under more normal conditions. For this reason, the Department would be willing to postpone the negotiations if the Turks will agree, by an exchange of letters, to have a joint American-Turkish committee set up, within six months, which would examine the claims which the United States or Turkey should present and support. This committee would settle claims upon which they might agree and in addition would decide as to the classes of claims which should be arbitrated and regarding the form of such arbitration. Substantially this is the procedure which the Department suggested in its telegram via Lausanne, 149 of August 8, 2 p.m., and to which you referred in the third paragraph of your 293 of November 8.
7. Since the Turks would not be bound to specific categories by such a communication, it would not be reasonable for them to insist that the American Government should in this communication agree to drop classes of claims, and we would not consent to this.
8. The Department would be inclined to end the negotiations in case the Turks refuse both the submission of all points at issue to arbitration and this exchange of communications. However, any recommendations you may submit will be given careful consideration. Of course it is not at all likely that the treaty with Turkey would be submitted to the Senate if negotiations should thus be broken off.
9. If you see no serious objection to the procedure outlined in our paragraph 6 above and if you feel that at present no better solution [Page 1183] is possible, the Department would like to have you draft a possible letter to be exchanged, in the light of your recent talks with the Turkish representatives, and telegraph it to the Department for consideration.
10. You should, in dealing with this whole question, review the earlier telegrams of the Department, both to Constantinople and to the Special Mission at Lausanne. The various questions at issue have been so fully discussed in these telegrams that it would serve little purpose to give any detailed review of the various suggestions by the Turks, which are set forth in your 293 of November 8.