[Enclosure]
Memorandum by the Ambassador in Italy (Long)
When Mr. Suvich, Undersecretary of Foreign Affairs, came this afternoon
to the Embassy to return my call, he took advantage of the opportunity
to discuss at length the Four Power Pact. He confirmed the statements
recently made, which were the subject of a telegram to the Department,
giving the British Ambassador’s estimate of the Four Power Pact and the
failure of the French to use the correct text as agreed on here by the
French, English and German Ambassadors and by Mr. Suvich.
Mr. Suvich outlined the history of the Pact. I summarize it briefly as
follows: Italy proposed a text which I designate as text A. England had
some objections to the mention of colonies, taking the position that it
would embarrass her at this time. That part of the text was then
eliminated and it became text B. Then the French proposed a substitute
text without mention of colonies. It specifically
[Page 414]
alluded to Article 16 of the Covenant of
the League of Nations, and that became text C.40 Germany consented to this text under pressure from
Italy and it was accepted as the basis for further discussion, which
proceeded in Home.
Article 3 of text C was redrafted in Rome with slight modifications and
became text D. It was agreed to here by the representatives of the Four
Powers, including the French Ambassador, and the text of it was sent to
each of the governments. Slight alterations were made in this text D
during the few days in Rome when it was under discussion, and these
changes were telegraphed to Paris. It was all then sent to Geneva to be
approved by the legal experts of the League of Nations, when it
developed that the French had been using text C instead of text D and
that they had made on text C the modifications intended to be placed on
text D.
The difference between the two texts is said by Suvich to be one of
phraseology only and not of any real substance. The texts are reported
to have the same meaning but France has taken the position that she has
obtained the agreement of the Little Entente of text C and is unable to
propose to them the acceptance of what she now discovers is text D.
Both texts are said by Suvich to permit Germany to make certain progress
in armament but each such step in armament to be subject to approval by
all of the other Powers.
With the circumstances as they now exist, and with France having taken
the position that she had been using one text and was ready to agree to
it, and the other Powers having accepted another text, it seems as if
negotiations were at a standstill as far as any effective agreement is
concerned. Mr. Suvich expressed the thought that there might be some
solution. He said he was “not sure but still hopeful”. I gathered from
his remarks that he felt that there might be some agreement but that it
might not be very effective or of very great substance, and that he had
little hope that text D, on which they had built their hope, would be
accepted.
The Italian Government takes very seriously the prospect of failure to
reach agreement. Suvich said that with the disarmament conference
suspended and the Four Power Pact a failure there would be no real sense
of security in Europe and that there was the fear that the economic
conference could not succeed.
They are making another desperate effort to secure agreement, but with
France committed to one text and antagonistic to the other, and Germany
agreed to the other, it seems quite doubtful that success will crown the
efforts to reach agreement. However, conversations will
[Page 415]
proceed through Sunday and Monday. Signor
Mussolini’s address to the Senate is postponed from tonight until
Tuesday.
Having discussed the effect that the Pact might have on European security
and on the future peace of the world, and taking into consideration also
the comparative failure at Geneva during the last week, Suvich expressed
the hope of his Government that the President might feel moved to make
some communication to each of the Four Governments, indicating the
desire of the United States to see some agreement which would reflect
the prospect of continued peace in Europe. He said that his Government
felt that such an expression from the President would be very helpful
and would serve to bring accord.
