500.A15/196
The Chargé in Switzerland ( Winslow ) to the Secretary of State
[Received April 5.]
Sir: I have the honor to refer to my telegram No. 69, of March 24, 2 p.m.,68 and to report that I have just received, for transmission to the Department, a formal communication from the Secretary General of the League of Nations, addressed to the Secretary of State, dated March 19, 1926, stating that the Preparatory Commission for the Disarmament Conference will meet at Geneva on May 18, 1926. The communication, which is transmitted herewith, encloses the report of Monsieur Beneš (Document C.205.(1)1926.IX) adopted by the Council of the League at its meeting of March 18th.69 This report was summarized in my telegram No. 66, of March 18, 7 p.m.
The communication from the Secretary General adds that the Permanent Advisory Commission for Military, Naval and Air Questions will meet on May 19th, and the Department’s attention is drawn to that part of M. Beneš’ report adopted by the Council in accordance with which the States represented on the Preparatory Commission for the Disarmament Conference are invited to appoint military, naval and air experts to sit on the Permanent Advisory Commission on a footing of equality with members of that Commission to assist in the work of the Conference. Sir Eric requests that the Department be good enough to communicate to him, as soon as possible, the names of the experts who may be appointed in compliance with this section of the resolution.
In this connection I am aware that this scheme for the alteration of the character of the Permanent Advisory Commission was proposed [Page 64] by Admiral Aubrey Smith, British member of the Commission, and is an obvious and apparently successful effort to avoid any necessity of allowing questions in which the United States is interested to be referred to League organs on which there was no American representation. While the solution arrived at technically keeps intact the Permanent Advisory Commission as at present constituted, i. e. a commission on which there are only represented military, naval and air experts of the States members of the Council, and while during the forthcoming Preparatory Disarmament Conference that body will retain its same designation, it may be pointed out that, for the duration and purposes of the Conference, this body becomes in reality a technical sub-committee of the Preparatory Commission.
The enclosed communication from Sir Eric also points out that the Council has decided to increase the number of members of the Joint Commission, which is associated with the Preparatory Commission, by the addition of four members specially competent to deal with questions connected with industry and transport and to include a national of each of the following States: United States of America, Japan, Germany, and the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics. No request, however, is made of the Department at this time to inform the Secretariat of the name of the member of the American delegation, competent to deal with questions connected with industry and transport, who may be designated to sit with the Joint Commission. I shall endeavor to ascertain if and when such a request is to be made and shall inform the Department promptly.
In this connection, it may be pointed out that this decision to permit American representation on the Joint Commission for the purposes and duration of the Preparatory Disarmament Conference was likewise influenced by the desire to avoid the necessity of submitting to League organs on which the United States was not represented questions in which it was interested.
During the week-end following the adjournment of the Council and the Assembly of the League of Nations I took occasion to go to Geneva and at that time had an opportunity to discuss various matters informally with Mr. Madariaga, of the Secretariat of the League, and with Sir Eric Drummond. As pointed out in my telegram No. 69,70 both these officials told me that the view is generally held in Geneva that the heads of the various delegations, with their assistants, during the meeting which commences on May 18th, would sit for only about ten days and then adjourn leaving the various technical questions to be discussed by the Permanent Advisory Commission and the Joint Commission. It is to be noted that while the Permanent Advisory Commission is to convene on May 19th, the presence of the [Page 65] military, naval and air experts of the American delegation with the remaining members of the delegation at the meeting on May 18th would not seem to be precluded. It is apparent, however, that these experts, as well as the experts of the other States non-members of the Council, are to be detached from the main Commission on the 19th in order to sit separately in a conference with the original members of the Permanent Advisory Commission and on an equal footing with them. It is estimated that this latter commission, as pointed out above, would continue to sit after the adjournment of the heads of delegations for a period of approximately ten days or two weeks longer.
It is also to be noted that, while the date for the convocation of the Joint Commission has not been fixed, it is stated in the report of Monsieur Beneš, adopted by the Council, that the Preparatory Commission would invite the Joint Commission by telegram to convene presumably a few days subsequent to May 18th; again, there would appear to be nothing which would preclude the participation of the assistant delegate on the American delegation who may eventually be designated to sit with the Joint Commission, from attending the plenary conference pending the convocation of the Joint Commission.
Sir Eric and Monsieur [Señor] Madariaga told me that it is generally believed, and they share this view, that it will be possible for the heads of delegations, as well as for the two reorganized technical commissions, to conclude their preliminary study of the entire matter within the period of time indicated above. They also felt that following the conclusion of this preliminary study, it would be necessary, before further study is resumed, to allow in most cases the heads of the various delegations, as well as their advisers, to return to the seat of their governments for consultation. It was believed that there would be sufficient time for such consultation if the Preparatory Commission as well as the reorganized technical committees, should not convene again until the latter part of July and that at that time these second sessions would again be terminated within a period of from ten days to two weeks.
While it is obvious that the procedure outlined above is not to be taken as a definite indication of the actual procedure which may be followed, it appears to be sufficiently definite to warrant careful consideration by the Department. Moreover, it does not seem likely that more definite indications can be obtained until the actual meeting of the Conference on May 18th.
Regardless of the status of the work of the Preparatory Commission and the technical committees at the time of adjournment following the July meeting, i. e. whether their work was complete or not, Mr. Madariaga was of the opinion that nothing further would be done [Page 66] until the Assembly had met in September. Fearing that this statement implied that the Assembly, on which, of course, the United States would not be represented, would take action, either through recommendations or amendments, on the work of the Preparatory Disarmament Conference, I asked Mr. Madariaga what was meant by his statement. In explanation, he said that as a matter of course the Council must report to the Assembly at each September session on all the work carried on by the various agencies of the Council during the year dating from the preceding September; that this is a routine matter and that the Council would merely report to the Assembly the findings of the Preparatory Commission, and that the Assembly, in turn, as a routine matter, would adopt the report of the Council. He said that the report of the Council would, of course, be in reality the report of the Preparatory Commission and whatever its findings or recommendations were, it was a foregone conclusion that those would be the findings and recommendations of the Council and the Assembly.
I have [etc.]