Office of the Historian

500.A15A4/2361: Telegram

The American Delegate to the Bureau of the Conference (Wilson) to the Acting Secretary of State

Geneva, November 16, 1933—6 p.m.
[Received November 16—5:20 p.m.]

785. For the Under Secretary.

1.
It may be of interest to summarize the impressions resulting from a number of conversations here at Geneva.
2.
While affairs in Geneva are moving with exceptional slowness and while the Conference of disarmament qua conference appears to be limping badly there are real indications that activity exists both on disarmament and other political questions among the principal states of Europe.
3.
It is interesting to contrast the declarations of Von Neurath and Mussolini with those of Boncour and Sarraut22 as well as with those of MacDonald and Simon. All parties seem to feel the necessity for consultation at this period but there is a fundamental difference in the way in which they envisage this consultation. The Germans appear to insist that the League and the Conference be put to one side. Even in their approaches to France regarding the Saar they indicate a marked preference for dealing directly with France and putting to one side the machinery for the disposition of the Saar provided under the Treaty of Versailles. Italy seems to have the same conception though I question whether the conception is based on the same reason. France on the other hand has responded to overtures from the Germans by making it plain that both in the question of disarmament, the Saar, and any other matter they are willing to talk but only with the understanding that the talks are to facilitate an agreement which shall be reached at Geneva. The British situation is not entirely clear. That there is a considerable body of opinion in England which is endeavoring to force the Government to support the League is evident. Henderson’s threat of resignation may play an important part in forcing the Government’s hand in this direction. That the British Government is cognizant of this public opinion we also know. The British decision may well be the determining factor.
4.
In other words there cuts across the whole picture in Europe, both regarding disarmament in the forefront at the moment and regarding territorial adjustment more in the background, the question of the manner of dealing with such vital matters affecting world peace. On the one hand the French, while willing to facilitate agreement by bilateral conversations and the like away from Geneva, insist that while so doing they must keep in contact with their allies and eventually conclude any agreements within the framework of the League. On the other hand Germany, and in large measure Italy, are trying to eliminate Geneva as much as possible if not entirely to exclude the League with respect to the conclusions of such vital agreements. They desire to operate on an independent basis.
5.
These apparently are the important maneuvers now occupying the Governments of France, Germany, Italy and Great Britain, namely, whether the vital problems of European peace are to be settled in the last analysis by the League which Germany and Italy and possibly other governments consider a bulwark of French supremacy on the Continent or to be settled by direct negotiations on a basis free from League influence.
6.
The interest of governments, press and public in the four countries is so deep that something will probably be attempted within the relatively near future. While we continue to mark time in Geneva events are shaping themselves in such manner that perhaps sooner than we expect the jam may be broken and events move with great rapidity. It is impossible to forsee what will occur. The Disarmament Conference is now subordinate to the major political question of whether the European problems are to be dealt with by League machinery or otherwise. Thus the Conference may receive immediate stimulus through a decision to carry on by present methods or it may be adjourned in order to leave more freedom for other lines of action. The one thing that stands out clearly in my mind is that appearances at Geneva notwithstanding, the situation is not static and that at any moment it may move.
Wilson
  1. Premier of France.↩