765.84/4766: Telegram
The Consul at Geneva (Gilbert) to the Secretary of State
[Received July 1—6:50 p.m.]
276. 1. In the Assembly this afternoon:
Eden: The continuation of sanctions can serve no useful purpose; at the same time “this Assembly should not in any way recognize Italy’s conquest of Abyssinia” nor should there be any modification of the condemnation of Italy’s action; his Government is prepared to stand by the reciprocal assurances of mutual assistance given to certain governments to cover the temporary period of uncertainty which might ensue should existing sanctions be discontinued; attributed present failure of League to the fact that nations are prepared to take certain risks only where their own interests are directly at stake; problem of reform should be dealt with by the September Assembly; not necessarily rule of law but methods of enforcement should be amended to correspond to action which nations are in fact willing to take.
Canada: Held that economic pressure has been ineffective and that sanctions should be terminated.
South Africa: In a blunt speech referred to the British and French statements in the October Assembly, accused the great powers of refusing to fulfill their obligations, asserted that the League could not survive as an instrument of world peace unless sanctions were maintained and questioned whether South Africa could continue to collaborate with the great powers in the maintenance of peace.
Litvinoff: Respecting Ethiopian question sanctions were ineffective; respecting reform of League opposed scrapping articles 10 and 16 and asserted that economic sanctions should remain obligatory for all League members; the United States did not hamper the application of article 16; recommended regional pacts of mutual assistance.
2. The following general attitudes, which obviously influence decisions, are coming into evidence here respecting the Argentine initiative and the policy of nonrecognition: (a) the implied threat of Argentina [Page 180] to leave the League unless its wishes be acceded to has made a notably bad impression among both European and Latin American delegations; it is not felt to represent true Argentine policy and is characterized as only a form of blackmail; (b) a number of delegates here, aside from their desire not to take a position which would militate against European appeasement, cite their experience with sanctions as a reason for their opposition to any binding action in respect of nonrecognition, being disinclined at present to join in a common undertaking which might be broken by states for their individual advantage.