500.A15/1129: Telegram
The Chairman of the American Delegation (Gibson) to the Secretary of State
[Received 11:58 p.m.]
33. We have during the past day or two had several private conversations with delegates concerning the general subject of derogations in an effort to elicit their general views as to how the escape clause can be made most effective and acceptable. We have found that one of their main preoccupations was to reconcile any possible draft with the obstacle constituted for League members by the provision in paragraph 4 of article 8 of the Covenant to the effect that when a disarmament agreement is reached “the limits of armaments therein fixed shall not be exceeded without the concurrence of the Council.”
We have found a considerable measure of sympathy with our view that an escape clause should be drafted so broadly as to avoid [Page 196] the defects of an itemized statement of reasons for modification (such as rebellion, menace of aggression, technical development, growth of civilization, et cetera) and to afford reassurance to the signatories in accepting low figures in the knowledge that they can, in the case of real need, modify them so far as strictly necessary.
In view of the wording of the Covenant above referred to it seems to be generally felt that the best hope of a solution lies in the stipulation that modifications are to be temporary in character, and we have therefore felt justified in inserting language and adding a final paragraph to this effect. We are in full accord as to the analysis given in your 9, November 20, 2 p.m., and after our conversations are confirmed in the belief that the best course is the one indicated by you as first in the order of preference.
As various alternative drafts are being submitted for consideration by a special subcommittee which is to meet tomorrow in preparation for general debate which will probably take place Monday, and since there seems to be a general feeling that a draft submitted by us would be most helpful, we are circulating tomorrow a draft of which the following is the text:
“If, during the life of the present convention, a change of circumstances constitutes, in the opinion of any high contracting party, a menace to its national security, such high contracting party may modify temporarily, in so far as concerns itself, any [article] or articles of the present convention, other than those expressly designed to apply in the event of war, provided:
- (a)
- That such high contracting party shall immediately notify the other high contracting parties of such temporary modification, and of the extent thereof;
- (b)
- That simultaneously with the notification referred to in point (a) the high contracting party shall make to the other high contracting parties full explanation of the change of circumstances referred to above.
Thereupon the other high contracting parties shall promptly advise as to the situation thus presented.
When the reasons for such temporary modification have ceased to exist, the said high contracting party shall reduce its armaments to the level agreed upon in the convention, and shall make immediate notification to other high contracting parties”.
You will note that article EA of chapter V of the draft convention (document 211)84 precludes any possible modification by this draft of existing treaties dealing with armament including those of Washington and London.
- League of Nations, Documents of the Preparatory Commission, Series X, pp. 423, 458.↩