500.A14/692: Telegram
The Secretary of the American Delegation to the General Disarmament Conference (Reber) to the Secretary of State
[Received August 16—9:50 a.m.]
924. Department’s telegram No. 444, August 14, 6 p.m. It is difficult to find justification for the conclusions drawn by the Persian representative in respect to the revision of the Geneva Convention and alterations in the barred zones since no final decision concerning either of these questions has been taken by the General Commission, by the Plenary Committee for the Regulation of Trade in and Manufacture of Arms or by its subcommittee on trade in arms.
The recent committee meeting dealt primarily with provisions controlling manufacture in view of the fact that as the report of the committee states (Conference D 171 July 2, 1934, paragraph No. 649) “as regards trade in arms the adaptation of the convention of 1925 to the needs of the Disarmament Conference has already been studied in the subcommittee on trade.” For discussion of a proposed Persian amendment see page 11 of the document under reference.
As regards earlier recommendations concerning revision of the 1925 convention the report of the subcommittee on trade (Conference document C. C. F. 40 and 40 A May 27, 30, 1933 paragraph 250) refers to a previous decision of the Plenary Committee approved by the Bureau November 1932 to the effect that “The committee has again [agreed] in principle to recommend the revision of the 1925 Convention but for reasons of expediency to limit the amendment to the minimum strictly required.” This decision formed the basis of the work of the subcommittee whose report was forwarded to the General Commission as an annex to its own progress report (Conference document 160 June 3, 193351).
As regards the testimony in the note of the Persian Minister concerning agreed alterations in the prohibited zones paragraph 29 of the subcommittee’s report referred to states inter alia that the subcommittee has decided to refer to the Plenary Committee the question of the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman which more especially concerns the United Kingdom and the Persian delegations. Thus the subcommittee has made no final recommendations concerning the barred zone nor has there been a decision by the Plenary Committee in this respect.
[Page 480]The Persian delegation had proposed that the control of arms traffic in the Persian Gulf should be left to an arrangement between Great Britain and Persia. This was not accepted by the United Kingdom delegation (paragraph 29 of the report). The other members of the subcommittee took little part in the discussion of this question save to urge the United Kingdom and Persian representatives to endeavor to reconcile their differences so as to permit some measure of agreement to be inserted in the final report.
Further studies by the subcommittee on trade are scheduled to take place in September.