500.A15A4 Steering Committee/167: Telegram
The American Delegate (Wilson) to the Secretary of State
[Received November 21—1:50 p.m.]
465. From Davis and Wilson. We have been considering what might be done to bring concrete results out of the General Disarmament Conference without an interminable delay and in this connection what our future policy should be.
We must recognize that after 8 months of work the Conference has not yet reached the point of drafting a general and all inclusive treaty of a far reaching character. Nevertheless, this much has been gained: today the Conference and the nations of the world would not be finally satisfied with half-way measures as might have been the case last February and there is now a greater degree of earnestness and sincerity in attacking the problem.
The French plan and the proposals in Sir John Simon’s speech have now been injected into the Conference work to supplement the Hoover plan and so far as we can see it would require months and perhaps years to realize the far reaching objective sought by these proposals especially by the French plan even if the latter were acceptable in principle and susceptible of being worked out which we seriously doubt. On further consideration of the French plan our opinion is that certain features of it are inherently unsound and that its failure when forced to the test would wreck the peace machinery which is being laboriously built up. In the first place it contemplates creating through the League what would be in effect a super state backed by continental military force; second, it is based upon the assumption that continental powers shall enter into an agreement of mutual assistance for upholding the status quo in Europe while at the same time it offers no possibility of the peaceful [Page 399] changing of the status quo except through arbitration on a strictly legal basis; third, it in effect calls upon the United States and England at least to give their moral support to such a political organization of Europe and to consult and take other steps in case of efforts to alter the status quo by the use of force. They are accordingly attempting to develop and incorporate in a disarmament treaty what they conceive to be the implications of your August 8th speech with all of the moral obligations involved in such [implications?].
What the states of the Continent do for the Continent is not our business. It only becomes our business when they ask us to give it our support. Thus it is one thing for them to organize as they see fit within the inner concentric circle. It becomes another matter when they ask us to assume any obligation whatever toward the proper functioning within the inner circle.
A constructive solution of the so-called European security problem may require some program for concerted action by the continental powers for the maintenance of peace but it is unsound to base this upon the theory of perpetual maintenance of the territorial and political status quo in Europe. The French now in effect propose the creation of an international force available by majority vote to maintain this status quo and at the same time fail to provide adequate facilities for altering by orderly processes a status where justice and the maintenance of peace require a change.
In summing up the whole situation as we see it we are faced with the necessity of some immediate achievement in which Germany collaborates and acquiesces; otherwise we must contemplate the denunciation by Germany of part 5 of the Versailles Treaty followed by a major European crisis. The situation is such that the world cannot wait for the accomplishment of these very ambitious objectives which the Conference has set.
We feel that the wise course to pursue would be to endeavor as promptly as possible to register in the form of a “convention” of limited duration while [which?] we are describing in a separate cable the progress which has so far been made; set up the Disarmament Commission; and entrust to this Commision the task of endeavoring to work out as the second step the proposals mentioned above.
To accomplish this and at the same time satisfy the German demands will not be easy. It might be possible, however, to induce Germany in this critical stage of world affairs to accept a partial degree of satisfaction for a limited period if she could be convinced that during this period a sincere effort would be made to give more complete satisfaction to her claims. In effect since Germany on the [Page 400] financial side has been granted the practical elimination of reparations and many private creditors have been indulgent she might be called upon to show consideration in the field of disarmament if some satisfaction in principle could be accorded.
We do not overlook the great difficulty of the program outlined above. On the other hand we feel that the method of procedure adopted by the Conference, namely, that of public debates in large commissions has tended to exaggerate obstacles and has obviously made it most difficult for the various powers to state the ultimate limits to which they were prepared to go. In view of the publicity it has been impossible to make concessions since there was no way of ascertaining simultaneously sub-rosa possible compensating concessions on the part of others, every problem before the Conference being debated as an isolated question rather than as part of a general plan.
We believe that the only hope of ascertaining and formulating, for a preliminary convention, the points on which present agreement is possible, is through private discussions between a small number of powers directed toward this limited but immediate objective. Unless some such plan of work can be developed the alternative seems to be for the Conference to lose itself in interminable discussions of detail with the indefinite prolongation of the work or what is more likely a complete breakdown. The first mentioned alternative would obviously bring up the question as to our willingness to continue our participation as in the past.
Last night Davis asked Simon what he thought of doing something along above lines and he was most enthusiastic about it.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
In a conversation with Massigli Friday morning Davis told him that unless there is some concrete evidence of progress within the next few weeks he fears that opposition may develop at home to our continuing to participate in a conference which after so many months of effort is unable to achieve more than it has to date. He explained that since we would not care to sit on here indefinitely waiting for the military reorganization of Europe as envisaged in the French plan it occurred to him that we might in addition to completing the London Naval Treaty consider the possibility of a preliminary convention along these lines above indicated. Massigli liked the idea of such a convention and said that he would take the matter up with the Government this week-end as to how far they would be willing to go. Davis explained, of course, that the suggestions were purely tentative as he did not know yet the views of his Government.
To ascertain whether any plan such as we have outlined is feasible it is necessary to explore the ground through a meeting such as [Page 401] originally suggested by MacDonald. Unless political difficulties in France prevent, it might be feasible to arrange such a meeting here in the near future assuming that the new government in Germany would be disposed to cooperate to this extent. Neurath arrives here tonight and as such a meeting could be held without committing them to return formally to the Conference and without the publicity attendant upon a formal conference it seems unlikely that they would oppose the idea.
We would not, of course, wish to go any further along these lines unless we felt that you concurred in our general analysis of the situation and in the method of procedure. It would not, of course, be necessary for us to take the initiative in organizing any preliminary meeting nor to assume the responsibility of advocating a preliminary convention as we believe that some such idea would naturally evolve if the private conversations were started under proper auspices.
We hope to report shortly regarding result of efforts to complete London Naval Treaty which have made some progress this week. More detailed suggestions follow in a subsequent telegram. These details have not been discussed with other delegations pending your comment.