500.A15 a 1/327: Telegram
The Chairman of the American Delegation (Gibson) to the Secretary of State
[Received 11:55 p.m.]
32. There is, in my opinion, no reason for being disheartened even though no specific accord has been reached on any question during the [Page 57] first week. The obstacles with which we are faced can, I believe, be overcome, although they are serious. The two most difficult ones are the elaboration of a formula which, while satisfying Japanese amourpropre, will yet maintain the Washington treaty ratio; and the even more serious wish of Great Britain to have no limitation placed upon the number of small cruisers.
Judging from the discussions of the past week, I feel quite certain that there will be no insistence on the part of the British upon the taking up of their suggestions in regard to capital ships. It will ultimately be necessary in this regard to arrive at a satisfactory formula providing for postponement of this matter until 1930 [1931?], reserving at that time complete liberty of action. Subject to the question of ratio, I am of the opinion that technical agreement with Japan, covering submarines and possibly destroyers, can be reached. At the present time, however, there is considerable divergence between us as regards maximum size of destroyers. The matter upon which there are the greatest differences is that of cruisers, and considerable maneuvering with regard to the order of taking up the various questions is being indulged in. In order to make a rupture on the subject of cruisers alone seem unjustifiable should that question be the only one disputed, the British desire to arrive at a speedy agreement with us in respect of submarines, hoping to get concessions in this class at least. Our position that agreements with regard to the various categories of vessels should be interdependent and that all questions of a technical nature should be examined together is being vigorously maintained.
We are, furthermore, endeavoring to dispose, as soon as possible, of the British suggestions concerning the Washington treaty. A satisfactory explanation of their having been propounded is difficult to find unless the British desired to justify their possible refusal to agree to limitation of small cruisers by our refusal of their above-mentioned proposals. They certainly must have known how unacceptable we would find these proposals. It is my hope that all questions bearing upon a change of the Washington treaty will be out of the way before the end of the discussion upon cruisers.
The disposition on the part of the American press representatives here to support unflinchingly our position without regard to the political color of their papers has been extremely helpful. It is, in my opinion, producing a distinct effect on the British delegation, who appear, judging from their conversations with American newspapermen, to have taken to heart the outspoken criticism of their proposals which has been published in the American press.