500.A15 a 1/56

Memorandum by the Chief of the Division of Western European Affairs (Castle)

The Secretary: The Italian Ambassador came to my house this afternoon to read me two telegrams from Mussolini with regard to [Page 18] the Italian answer to the Memorandum on naval limitation. In these telegrams Mussolini instructed the Ambassador to see to it that the Italian answer did not create any talk in this country as to Italian militarism. He said that the whole world should understand that Italy was the most peaceful and peace-loving of nations. He said that the only reason that it was impossible to give an affirmative answer was that, although the situation between France and Italy was better than it had been it was still delicate and that Italy feared the bad feeling which might be aroused by a discussion between the two countries on the question of a parity between the two navies. Mussolini wanted us to understand, therefore, that if Italy could be assured in advance that this question would not be discussed, that the parity established at the Washington Conference would certainly be extended to the smaller ships, he would be very glad to re-examine the invitation of the United States in a most friendly spirit.

I told the Ambassador that it seemed to me that it was exactly this kind of question that must be examined by the Conference, that the United States alone could not determine it any more than we could say that the other ratios of the Washington Conference must be considered final when applied to a smaller type of vessel. I said that you perfectly understood that particular nations had particular necessities and that for this very reason the invitation had been made very general. I told him that the insistence of Italy in the note that she, at least, had no extensive naval program was naturally accepted but that the later statement that other nations had such programs was the best reason in the world why Italy should have accepted the invitation. The Ambassador said that the reference was to France and Jugoslavia. I answered that I took this for granted, that the conference would have restrained any too great zeal on the part of France, in that it would have put an end to competition; that so far as Jugoslavia was concerned I did not think the country was in any condition financially to proceed with any large naval program but that there would certainly be no incentive to push such a program if Italy had obligated itself to build no gigantic fleet. He said that this was possible but that if, in spite of an agreement between Italy and France and the others the Jugoslavs still persisted it would be very disagreeable. I told him that we knew as well as anyone that circumstances change with the years and that no agreement was so fixed that the powers making it could not get together again for reconsideration, that in the meantime the result would certainly be the cessation of a silly and costly competition.

It is perfectly clear to me that the Ambassador agrees with us and not with his Government. He took notes of what I said and will [Page 19] cable Rome. He said the papers today had been inclined to blame the Italian stand and agreed with me that this was to have been expected. He said as he left that he hoped our answer might enable Rome to reconsider the question.

W[illiam] R. C[astle]