500.A14/636
The Secretary of State to the Persian Minister ( Djalal )
My Dear Mr. Minister: I have carefully considered the questions, in regard to the Arms Traffic Convention of 1925, which you raised in your conversation with me on May 11 [14?], and I take pleasure in setting forth the position of this Government in regard to that Convention. I venture to hope that this explanation of our position will remove any doubts, which your Government may have, that ratification by this Government would delay or hamper the revision of the Convention which the Persian Government desires.
[Page 452]You will remember that the revision of the Convention has recently been discussed at Geneva, with a view to incorporating in or appending to the proposed General Disarmament Convention provisions for the purpose of establishing some measure of international control of the international traffic in arms. The representatives of this Government were active in the discussions, in regard to this matter, which took place in the Disarmament Conference Committee for the Regulation of the Trade in and Private and State Manufacture of Arms and Implements of War, during 1932 and 1933. The various statements which the Persian Delegates made during those discussions were sympathetically noted by this Government. On January 28, 1933, we informed our Delegation at Geneva8 that your Legation had expressed apprehension lest the Message of President Hoover of January 10, recommending that the Senate give its advice and consent to the ratification of the Arms Traffic Convention of 1925, might be construed as indicating this Government’s approval and support of those portions of Chapter III of that Convention to which your Government objects. We added that this construction was unwarranted and instructed the Delegation that it should not oppose the acceptance of the modifications proposed by the Persian Delegation.
You realize, I am sure, how earnest have been the efforts of this Government to aid in the negotiation of a General Disarmament Convention. We must, however, face the fact that recent developments in various parts of the world have made the negotiation of such a Convention increasingly difficult. We shall continue to put forth our efforts at Geneva and to assist in every possible way in the negotiation of a Convention which will, we hope, embody a revision of the Arms Traffic Convention of 1925. Nevertheless, in view of the tremendous difficulties now facing the General Disarmament Conference and in view of the possibility that it may fail to conclude a Convention, this Government feels that it is advisable that the Arms Traffic Convention of 1925 be ratified, not because it considers that Convention to be without defects, but because, in default of any other Convention, it will serve to provide some measure of international control of the traffic in arms. We are convinced that supervision and control of this traffic is eminently desirable, and we feel that we must seize upon this occasion to assure, if possible, international action to this end.
The Arms Traffic Convention is now before the Senate. The President has urged that the Senate give its advice and consent to ratification. The Senate has not as yet acted upon this recommendation. It is probable that if the Convention is eventually ratified by this Government, our ratification will be accompanied by a reservation, subjecting [Page 453] its coming into force in respect to the United States to its ratification by other specified powers. Ratification by this Government would imply no change in our position, as explained to your Legation in January, 1933, and would not result in any diminution of our efforts at Geneva.
I am [etc.]
- Telegram No. 284; not printed.↩