500.A15a3/436
Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State (Castle) of a Conversation With the Italian Ambassador (De Martino)
The Italian Ambassador read me a paraphrase of a cable, sent apparently for his information, on the Italian attitude toward the Naval Conference. He said that Italy must have parity with France. The reason in favor of this is that Italy, because of its situation, has greater interest even than France in receiving supplies from overseas. This, in the opinion of the Italian Government, fully counterbalances the French claim for a larger navy because of having [Page 270] two shores to defend. The Italian Government feels further that the agreement as to parity between Great Britain and the United States is of great value to Italy in its claim for parity with France. One of the French arguments in favor of a larger navy than Italy is that France has more, and more widely scattered colonies which must be defended. Certainly Great Britain might well make the same argument in its discussions with the United States and the fact that Great Britain has agreed to parity with us ought to make it very easy for France to agree to parity with Italy. I told the Ambassador that what he said was interesting, but that I did not feel that his arguments had any validity whatever. I said it seemed to me France needed to receive supplies from overseas just as much as Italy did and that the very fact of having two coasts to defend would make France’s need for a navy greater.
As to the American-British argument, I pointed out that one reason why, with its colonies and empire, Great Britain could still afford parity with the United States was the fact that it had naval bases scattered all over the world. I told him, of course, that I could not possibly take sides in the Italian-French controversy and that I was merely pointing out to him the obvious answers which could be made. I told him all I hoped was that both France and Italy would go into the Conference with the full determination to make it a success.