500.A15a3/1175: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Chargé in France (Armour)
270. Your No. 337, October 22, 3 p.m. The primary interest of the American Government is not whether the French naval building program is what is announced in Figaro, or elsewhere; it is solely whether or not the building program of the French Government is of such size and character as to threaten the stability in the naval levels set by the London Treaty.
While an exact formula for figures is not being suggested, the American Government has pointed out, and it has been informed that the Government of Japan will do likewise, the advisability of permitting the issue to be postponed during the lifetime of the present treaty. The interests of both France and Italy might be fully safeguarded, it would seem, by a unilateral statement by France to the effect that while the London Treaty remains in force, that is up to 1936, her building program could be reduced materially, subject, of course, to a similar and satisfactory unilateral declaration by Italy.
Similar representations accompanied by suggestion of the same formula of a unilateral declaration have been made to Italian Government together with suggestion that whole question of naval parity be postponed until 1936. The entire matter has been discussed with Claudel, and it has been pointed out, furthermore, that France was not in any way adding to her security by insisting on high levels in naval armament and by prolonging unduly the period of uncertainty on this subject through failing either to come to an agreement with Italy or to act simultaneously with that power along independent lines.
It is my belief that Claudel has not got across the true gist of my conversation with him on the subject; Gibson should be very careful, therefore, to emphasize every point as if the French Government had no previous knowledge of the subject he wishes to take up.
Repeated to Embassy at London.58
- Transmitted as Department’s telegram No. 269, October 23, 9 p.m.↩