765.84/3036: Telegram
The Consul at Geneva (Gilbert) to the Secretary of State
[Received 10:25 p.m.]
649. 1. At a private meeting of the Committee of Eighteen today Laval reviewed previous declaration which had been [apparent omission] by Hoare and himself respecting their efforts to conciliate the dispute and concluded by saying:
“The Italian and Abyssinian Governments were informed yesterday of our suggestions. We propose to communicate them very shortly to the Council of the League.
“Our task will then be at an end and it will be for the League itself to decide what is to be done. We are at least confident that it will appreciate the loyalty of an effort which I say again had no other purpose than to hasten the settlement within the League itself of a dispute of which the prolongation weighs heavily on the world.”
Eden then made the following statement:
“Last November, as my colleagues will recall, when the Coordination Committee agreed upon certain sanctions which are now in force, at the same time it specifically approved all attempts to find a basis of discussion between the two parties to this dispute, and it particularly welcomed the suggestion that His Majesty’s Government and the French Government should seek to find such a basis. We have no mandate from the Coordination Committee and that Committee had no power to give us such a mandate, but my colleagues will remember that we had their unanimous good will in our task. What therefore the representatives of the United Kingdom and French Governments have been seeking to do in Paris was to work out proposals that might be submitted to both sides and upon which both sides might be willing to come together in open discussions here at Geneva. These conversations in Paris were begun with the approval of members of the League and neither the French Government nor ourselves have at any time had any other intention than to bring the outcome of our work to the League for the League’s information and judgment.
“The proposals now put forward are neither definite nor sacrosanct. They are suggestions which, it is hoped, may make possible the beginning of negotiations. If the League does not agree with these suggestions we shall make no complaint, indeed we shall cordially welcome any suggestions for their improvement. The policy of His Majesty’s Government remains today what it has been since the dispute began. Any final settlement must be acceptable to the League as well as to the two parties in conflict.
“In the circumstances, it seems to me that the best procedure to follow at the present time is to call together the Council at the earliest moment practicable in order that a full statement of the proposals should be made to it. It will be for that body to determine as and when it sees fit what course it would wish to pursue in the light of the [Page 707] situation thus created, and in advance I emphasize that as far as His Majesty’s Government is concerned we will not only readily accept the judgment of our colleagues but we will continue to use our best efforts to further the two objectives which have been constantly before us in this dispute—the restoration of peace and the maintenance of the authority of the League.”
The Chairman thanked the French and British representatives for their declarations, but said that it was not for the Committee to discuss them.
The representative “emphasized that the important declarations that have been made created a new situation. He would abstain from any comment on the merits for this was a task for a competent organ of the League. He thought that the declarations of M. Laval and Mr. Eden obliged the Committee to be very prudent and to abstain from interference with the task of the Council. The Committee’s work was legally independent of the League, but he was influenced by political events, and especially by the efforts for a restoration of peace. While he considered that it was for the competent organs of the League to consider the importance of what had happened, he felt that the Committee should abstain from any further political action until the Council of the League had exhausted its views on the suggestions of France and the United Kingdom. The adoption of further measures by the Committee might prove an obstacle to the work which the Council will have to undertake.”
2. The Committee will begin consideration of the experts’ report tomorrow.
3. From informed sources the situation appears to be about as follows. The British and French positions are that no action be taken on the question of the embargo on raw materials until the matter of the Paris proposals will be privately transmitted by the British and the French to Council members tomorrow. Both the British and the French would like to have a Council meeting held on Saturday to consider these proposals but the small powers insist on a delay in order to study them and a Council meeting on this subject will take place next week, probably Wednesday. There is also in this delay the factor that replies may by that time have been received from Rome and Addis Ababa.
The British privately forecast the Council’s disapproval of the proposals. This forecast was so stated as to imply a hope to that effect, a member of the British delegation saying to me frankly that unfavorable Council action would “pull us out of a hole.”
4. Consulate’s No. 646, December 11, 3 p.m. The general situation is still one of confusion and depression and it is difficult to forecast what may transpire. The temper of mind among the small-power [Page 708] delegations is illustrated by expressions of belief that the expose of the Paris conversations to the Council will not reveal all that took place at Paris and that secret arrangements were made there between Great Britain and France and possibly also with Italy.