500.A15A4 General Committee/297: Telegram
The Chargé in France (Marriner) to the Secretary of State
[Received April 18—9:30 a.m.]
165. From Norman Davis. In separate cables, numbers 163 and 164, I have made substantive recommendations regarding our policy in disarmament matters. There remains the question of procedure.
The General Commission will reconvene on April 15. At present no one sees exactly how the Conference can do constructive work immediately upon reconvening and there is very general apprehension that there may be a clash on matters of detail of the MacDonald plan which might lead to a rupture. The French have urged upon us the desirability of a postponement but are reluctant to make a move in this direction because of the reaction this would have in Germany. As I reported, Neurath37 and Bulow38 both felt that the Hitler Government would be unprepared on April 25 to commit itself on fundamentals and stated that a few weeks’ delay was desirable but in the uncertain situation in Germany it is impossible to predict what the German attitude might be a few weeks hence and it is important to keep in mind that they would undoubtedly oppose any long delay and would probably withdraw from the Conference in the event of a postponement unless a definite date for reconvening in the relatively near future were fixed. MacDonald and Herriot’s absence is an added reason for some delay particularly in the case of MacDonald as his sponsorship of the plan makes his presence here to help push the work along most important.
In the present delicate political situation it is particularly dangerous to attempt to do too many things at the same time. On April 25 and for a week or two thereafter the attention of the world and the activities of the principal foreign offices will be directed mainly toward the discussions in Washington.39 A set-back in the disarmament work during this period would gravely prejudice the success of the economic work you will have in hand.
To create a basis for successful work at Geneva and to use every effort toward the ultimate success of the Economic Conference I am convinced that it is essential to bring about a political appeasement between the European Powers. The recent French memorandum40 does not seem to me necessarily to close the door to agreement on some such basis as that proposed by Mussolini and MacDonald. If conversations on this subject should be held following the return of MacDonald [Page 99] and Herriot from Washington and are successful in finding any basis for agreement among the four powers it might then be desirable to broaden these conversations to include consideration of the disarmament problem with the United States and later perhaps to include Poland, Czechoslovakia, Japan and Russia in so far as this question alone is concerned. Such conversations should pave the way for the Disarmament Conference to resume its work with some hope of success and the Economic Conference could then meet in an atmosphere which would tend to get the best results.
To carry out this program it would mean that when the General Commission reconvenes on April 25 it should after a few sessions adjourn its work for a definite period, say 3 or 4 weeks. (Before adjournment is proposed it would, of course, be necessary to secure the acquiescence of Germany and Italy as well as England and France.)
Certain of the technical commissions could continue their work and thus avoid an adjournment of the Conference. The interval should then be employed for the conversations suggested above.
If the President and you agree with the foregoing I would throw in my weight for an adjournment or if necessary even propose it if upon reconvening on the 25th there is any indication that the debates are likely to precipitate a clash between the French and Germans. In the present state of political tension such a clash might terminate the disarmament work, create a situation which would prevent any political agreement between the western European powers and imperil the success of the Economic Conference. [Davis.]