765.84/4790: Telegram (part air)
The Consul at Geneva (Gilbert) to the Secretary of State
[Received July 7—5:40 a.m.]
287. The public utterances, private conversations and the atmosphere of the meetings which have just concluded here reflected a greater feeling of pessimism and defeatism than I have observed before in Geneva.
1. Respecting the European situation, there were no evidences of a cohesion of policy offering hope for an early settlement. Aside from an obvious divergence of view the most marked characteristic was a lack of incisiveness respecting any view. The atmosphere of the situation is illustrated in that even in the cases when the representatives of the great powers expressed themselves with more positiveness, the reaction in the small delegations was that in view of their experiences of the recent months what they desired was not more words but deeds. The general picture is presented that the trend of affairs will for a time at least be determined by some action by Germany or Italy or by material happenings rather than through the decisions of the Geneva powers.
To cite one example, the Greek and Yugoslav Ministers told me that in respect of Eden’s statement concerning the Mediterranean mutual assistance arrangements the British had not even mentioned the matter to them here and they characterize his statement as merely convenient phrasing. Furthermore, in a private meeting of the Balkan and Little Ententes in Geneva it was decided that in view of the “equivocal attitudes” of Great Britain and France their states would not speak in the Assembly. It will be noted that this unprecedented course was followed.
2. The question of the future of the League reflects the same situation.
3. Respecting the Italo-Ethiopian question, the discarding of sanctions was brought to the point of an accepted fact.
The technical position of Italy vis-à-vis the League as a state “condemned” of aggression remains; it had been definitely planned that the collateral question of nonrecognition implied in article 10 as applied to Abyssinia would not be presented. The Ethiopian attempt to obtain a vote on the subject was unsuccessful. The dispute as before the League has become lacking in substance and completely formalistic. The only question on this latter score which appears to remain is whether Rome may now demand juridical concessions particularly [Page 183] in the face of the “recognition” of the Emperor by the Assembly and the attendant incident precipitated by the Italian journalists.5
Respecting nonrecognition a member of the British delegation informed me in confidence that while an attempt to “recognize” an Italian Ethiopia was obviously an impossibility in this Assembly, British policy, nevertheless, was to have this matter dropped as quietly as possible or at most “vaguely” deferred until a de facto situation in Abyssinia could merge into a de jure situation. The Argentine initiative, although every effort was made to keep it solely on the basis of principle, rendered this difficult. A similar difficulty was encountered when the Ethiopian delegation presented a juridically “unassailable” case. Technically the question is now deferred to a greater extent than was desired to the September Assembly. The British feel that such a postponement is not necessarily a gain, but perhaps renders the immediate as well as the future situation respecting Italian cooperation more complicated; they believe that the Italians will not be able to improve their situation in Abyssinia during the rains and if the Emperor returns to Abyssinia as he threatens it may even be increasingly awkward for the League to “satisfy” Italy in September.
My informant added that he had reason to believe that Tokyo is contemplating that immediately any one of certain governments recognizes Italy in Abyssinia Japan will ask of such a government the recognition of Manchukuo.
4. Aside from the difficulty of discussing nonrecognition without any inferences relating to Abyssinia the feeling respecting the inappropriateness of the Argentine initiative was borne out by its being completely ignored by many speakers.
The final action was the result of a hard fought compromise by which the Argentine position was embedded in a general resolution which was, however, materially less than the Argentinians had desired and had expected to obtain.
5. The Latin American delegates have in the past fairly successfully maintained a common front. The Argentine action, however, evoked among them marked dissensions with consequent dissatisfaction. The last minute rally to the support of Argentina in the Assembly on the part of a number of Latin American delegations seemed from what was said to me to partake more of the character of standing by a sister American state in what had become something of an European-American issue than of their approval of the Argentine action in Geneva.
[Page 184]It would seem probable that these developments will not be without effect on general Latin American-League relations. It is felt in particular that they may have a tendency to sharpen the issues, moot in certain Latin American states, concerning continued support of the League.
- The vociferous protest raised by the Italian journalists against the Emperor of Ethiopia which led to their expulsion from the galleries.↩