500.A15A4 General Committee/946: Telegram
The Acting Secretary of State to the Chairman of the American Delegation (Davis)
421. Your 866, June 2, 8 p.m. Although the differences between the three documents you refer to, the French note to Germany of January 1, the British memorandum of January 29, and the German note [Page 98] of April 16 seem to us pretty fundamental, nevertheless the idea you suggest in paragraph 5 has the very real merit of recognising the basic viewpoints of the three most interested powers without commitment in favor of any one of the three. As such it would seem to provide a formula which would enable Germany to resume participation in the Conference if she desires to do so. This would be particularly true if the idea is advanced by powers such as the United States and the “Neutrals” who are frankly in the position of trying to conciliate the divergent viewpoints without being too closely associated with any one of the three.
Our policy should be to encourage the Germans to return and the French to meet them half way, rather than to attempt to exert pressure, even in the modified form you explained in your 853.90 In the face of the growing tension in Europe we cannot afford to impose our views on other powers against their considered judgment.
The intention you expressed of maintaining complete impartiality between the French and British at this juncture, and the nature of your answer to Schwartz, are both approved.
Many thanks for your admirable reports. It has been a critical week and we appreciate to the full all you have been doing.