611.6731/112
The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in Turkey (Grew)
Sir: The Department has received and given careful consideration to the Embassy’s strictly confidential despatch No. 488 of September 12, 1928, containing observations on the question of meeting the situation which will arise on April 10, 1929, when the commercial modus vivendi of February 17, 1927, between the United States and Turkey is due to expire.
With regard to the inquiry contained on page six of the despatch under reference, as to whether the Department desires that the commercial relations between the United States and Turkey should be continued under the existing or a similar modus vivendi, or whether the regularization of our commercial relations with Turkey in a more permanent form is desirable, the Department is of the opinion that the most feasible course is to conclude by exchange of notes a new commercial agreement, the term of which shall be indefinite.
While the commercial modus vivendi now in force has served its purpose in securing for American products imported into Turkey the advantages of most-favored-nation treatment, the limited term of this agreement makes its continuance in its present form undesirable. On the other hand, the negotiation at the present time of a commercial treaty between the United States and Turkey as is apparently envisaged by the Turkish Minister for Foreign Affairs, (see telegram No. 113, October 2, 11 a.m., 1928) is considered by the Department to be impracticable. While the opposition in this country to the American-Turkish Treaty of August 6, 1923, which led to its rejection by the Senate has doubtless decreased and will eventually disappear, it is believed that, with a view to avoiding any action that might encourage further anti-Turkish agitation in the United States and thus perhaps compromise the growing sentiments of friendliness toward Turkey, it would be preferable to postpone for the time being the negotiations of a further formal treaty with Turkey. In any event, it would probably not be possible to secure the consent of the Senate to the ratification of a treaty with Turkey until sometime after the expiration of our present commercial modus vivendi.
If you concur in this view, you may reflect it in your conversations on the subject with the Turkish authorities, adding, at the same time, such additional arguments as you believe may serve to reconcile those authorities to the Department’s position.
The Department desires, accordingly, to negotiate an agreement by means of an exchange of notes according mutual unconditional most-favored-nation treatment in customs matters without a definite [Page 963] time limit as to its duration. Such an agreement would, while safeguarding the commerce between the United States and Turkey from discrimination on either side, permit the two Governments to proceed at their leisure to the negotiation of a formal treaty of commerce and to sign such a treaty if and when to do so appears feasible.
As you are doubtless aware, the United States has, by exchange of notes, concluded with some thirteen countries similar agreements according mutual unconditional most-favored-nation treatment in customs matters. These countries are Brazil, Czechoslovakia, the Dominican Republic, Estonia, Finland, Greece, Guatemala, Haiti, Latvia, Lithuania, Nicaragua, Poland and Rumania. Arrangements designed to accomplish the same end are also in force with Albania, Persia and Spain.
Following precedents such as the foregoing, you are authorized, upon assurance of a reply in like terms, to address to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, a note in substantially the language of the draft enclosed42 with the present instruction.
Should Turkey desire to make exceptions with reference to frontier traffic or to countries formerly parts of the Ottoman Empire, as in Article XI of the Treaty signed on behalf of the United States and Turkey August 6, 1923, this Government could not, of course, decline to accept them. The Department hopes, however, that the enclosed text, which is practically the same, mutatis mutandis, as the note addressed by the American Minister at Bucharest, to the Rumanian Foreign Minister on February 26, 1926, (Treaty Series No. 733)43 will prove acceptable to the Government of Turkey. In the opinion of the Department, it amply meets the needs of the present situation in respect of a commercial agreement with Turkey.
In approaching the Turkish Government with a view to securing its approval of the above form of commercial agreement, you may, in your discretion, remark that the Department has noted with satisfaction the statement of the Minister for Foreign Affairs, as reported in your telegram, No. 113 of October 2, 11 a.m., to the effect that, in view of the similarity of respective tariff policies of the two countries, an agreement in the matter of commercial relations will be very easy to reach. You may also express the Department’s appreciation of the Minister’s desire to conclude with the United States the first of the new series of commercial treaties envisaged by Turkey and point out the reasons set forth above as to the infeasibility of such a procedure.
If, in your preliminary conversations with Tewfik Rushdi Bey, you receive a suggestion that the proposed agreement between the United States and Turkey should contain a system of mutual tariff rebates on [Page 964] certain imported commodities, you should make it clear that the tariff policy of the United States does not permit such an arrangement. You may then emphasize the fact that commerce between the United States and Turkey has prospered under the present provisional arrangement for mutual most-favored-nation treatment in customs matters and state that the American Government believes it would be mutually advantageous to provide, by a new exchange of notes, for continuance of that arrangement on a more permanent basis.
It is assumed that the Turkish authorities are appreciative of the importance to Turkey of her trade with the United States, as set forth in Mr. Gillespie’s memorandum of August 20, 1928,44 and that emphasis on this point may not be necessary. If, however, you have reason to believe that those authorities are not fully familiar with the powers vested in the President under Section 317 of the Tariff Act of 1922, by which he may cause retaliatory measures to be taken against the imports into the United States from any country practicing discrimination against American commerce, you may make such discreet reference to this fact as you may deem desirable under the circumstances. The Department is, however, appreciative of the cogency of the observations regarding the use of Section 317 set forth on pages 3 and 4 of despatch No. 488.
If you believe that further elucidation on any of the points set forth in the present instruction is necessary before you approach the Turkish Government in this matter, you should consult the Department by telegraph.
I am [etc.]
- Not printed.↩
- Foreign Relations, 1926, vol. ii, p. 898.↩
- Not printed.↩