500.A15A4 General Committee/210: Telegram
The Acting Chairman of the American Delegation (Gibson) to the Secretary of State
Geneva, March 17,
1933—2 p.m.
[Received 4:14 p.m.]
[Received 4:14 p.m.]
571. My 569 and 570. Comment on part II, section I, of effectives:
- Article 9. Subparagraph a reproduces provision of the Preparatory Commission draft convention which was accepted by the Department.87 Believed that application of this clause on the average daily effective basis, referred to in article 11, will not prejudicially affect us. Clauses b and c are nuisance provisions which have crept in primarily as a matter of concern among the powers of continental Europe. It is believed that these two clauses should be transferred to chapter II of part II which contains special provisions for the organization of the land armed forces stationed in continental Europe.
- Article 10 appears to us incapable of application in the United States without undue interference with private and state educational institutions. Such a provision if to appear in the convention might well be limited in its application to the forces of continental Europe.
- Article 11. Provision for deductions on account of sickness, leave, et cetera, would appear to invoke an undue amount of clerical labor and if a matter of concern to European powers should apply only to them and be transferred to chapter II.
- Article 12 does not appear to be acceptable. With us policemen cannot become effectives in the military sense by any other means [Page 56] than that applied to the population at large. The idea of counting police as effectives because they happen to have available weapons which are frowned upon in Europe is an absurdity which we have consistently opposed as applied to ourselves. In our opinion the whole of article 12 should be transferred to chapter II and made applicable only to the forces of continental Europe.
- Article 13. Clauses a and b have tentatively been accepted by the Department for the computation of land effectives. Although the inclusion of marines covered in clause b as part of land effectives may be of concern to both War and Navy Departments, nevertheless this has been tentatively accepted and in the determination of totals will probably cause no inconvenience to either Department. Clause c dealing with effectives of similar formations is another nuisance provision which in our opinion should be transferred to section II.
If you approve in principle of the changes suggested above the application of these will necessarily involve a change in the tentative figures appearing in table 1 and cause certain elements computed therein to be transferred to a table which necessarily must be drafted for chapter II.
Gibson