765.84/1753: Telegram
The Consul at Geneva (Gilbert) to the Secretary of State
[Received October 11—9:45 p.m.]
481. In view of the circumstance that the constitution of the Committee on Coordination (sanctions committee) is without precedent, it may be helpful to present certain considerations in regard to its character. The Department will have noted that the Council and the Assembly in considering the conclusions of the Council Committee of Six in regard to Italy’s resort to war in disregard of her obligations under the Covenant have proceeded on the basis that the obligations of League members with respect to the application of sanctions are obligations devolving directly on each individual state from article 16 of the Covenant and consequently that the responsibility for a decision entailing sanctions as a result of the ipso facto provisions of that article and the responsibility for the application of such sanctions likewise fall on each state individually. The Committee on Coordination therefore is not considered as a League organ in the constitutional sense of the term but rather as a conference of states members to coordinate their action as individual states.
In addition to this procedure, thus having a juridical basis, it affords from the League point of view the following advantages:
- 1.
- It obviates complications as to whether the Committee’s report should be submitted to the Council or to the Assembly and likewise [Page 671] any objections as to an infringement of the League’s rules of procedure or other technical matters which might be brought forward by Italy or some other state.
- 2.
- It permits the exclusion of Italy and Abyssinia for participation in the Committee’s work.
- 3.
- It permits states to take a position which may be considered as not entirely in harmony with the Covenant without affecting their status as League members, as for example, Austria and Hungary.
- 4.
- With respect to Italy, it permits Italy to remain in the League in line with the policy of France and Great Britain (Consulate’s 447, October 8, 3 p.m. penultimate paragraph88).
- 5.
- The idea has also been advanced that it would facilitate the participation of non-League states.
In regard to this last point, although it revives corridor discussion of the matter here, I have learned of no further developments in regard to the possibility of an invitation being extended to the United States.
As regards the character of the Committee, I may point out in this connection that when the Committee was constituted Beneš said: “It is as it were a kind of conference of states members meeting to consult together with a view to applying the provisions of article no. 16 of the Covenant of the League of Nations.”
- Not printed.↩