Foreign Relations of the United States, Diplomatic Papers, 1933, General, Volume I

500.A15A4 General Committee/268: Telegram

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

Geneva, April 1, 1933—3 p.m.
[Received April 1—12:40 p.m.]

598. Your 311, March 23, 6 p.m. As a result of preliminary consideration here based on necessarily inadequate information we are startled at the expenditure which apparently would be involved in any measures to carry out the proposed treatment of mobile land artillery together with its conversion and installation into fixed fortifications coupled with the auxiliary expenses thereto.

We are predicating this discussion upon the following:

1. That our thesis of the limit of 155 millimeter for mobile land guns will be accepted.

2. That there will be no limitation on numbers of guns converted and installed on fixed mounts for coast artillery.

3. That separate consideration must be given by us to the material for coast defense and to prohibited material for mobile land armies.

4. That most destruction of material will apply to that now used for mobile land warfare.

5. That there shall be no contractual obligations to destroy material but disposition of prohibited material shall be taken solely in accordance with technical considerations.

Under the foregoing consideration we believe we may be compelled to face the following.

(a) There appear to be some 800 pieces of mobile artillery above 155 millimeter (technically field pieces) which for technical reasons might be considered unsuitable for installation on fixed mounts and in addition approximately 200 pieces of mobile heavy artillery, railway and seacoast, which is suitable for conversion to fixed mounts.

(b) The cost of conversion with necessary auxiliary installations cannot be calculated here. An estimate of the amount involved based on the acceptance of the portion of the British plan which meets with the assumptions in the second paragraph would be greatly appreciated.

(c) The acceptance of any proposal you made for the abolition of heavy mobile artillery will certainly involve the conversion from mobile to fixed mounts of approximately 200 railway guns of this character which we now have. However, careful study is required to determine the number of guns which must be installed in addition to those converted to fixed mounts in order to counteract the reduction in the power of defense due to the loss of mobility.

(d) The construction of an undetermined number of field pieces of the calibre of 155 millimeter or below to replace the 800 guns mentioned in above.

(e) Our information is not sufficient to estimate a figure but we see a far reaching expense both at home and overseas for a coordinated defense due to the necessary installations including emplacements, magazines, ammunition, fire control, trackage, storage, personnel with provisions therefor, mine fields, harbor boatage, wharfage, breakwaters, et cetera, which will be inevitable in a program to maintain the present defensive power of our harbor defenses and to compensate for the laying down heavy mobile guns.

(f) We feel that a time limit will be insisted on for conversion, destruction or immobilization and this will necessitate the concurrent appropriation of funds to carry out accepted treaty provisions. While we can agree to immobilization prior to conversion we feel that such action might prove unacceptable to other powers and at the same time might temporarily jeopardize national defense.

(g) The question of land material may be considered by the General Commission shortly after May 1st. We realize detailed study of this problem is not possible in so short a time but we would greatly appreciate an approximate estimate of costs involved and if these estimates are deemed prohibitive then some guidance in order that we may consider alternative measures which may not be unsatisfactory.

(h) We fear for the fate in the Senate of any treaty which carries with it the unfavorable immediate result of a vastly increased expenditure in connection with armaments.

Wilson