Foreign Relations of the United States Diplomatic Papers, 1938, General, Volume I

840.48 Refugees/1181: Telegram

The Chargé in the United Kingdom (Johnson) to the Secretary of State

London, December 28, 1938—3 p.m.
[Received 5:20 p.m.]

1465. Personal for the President and the Acting Secretary of State from Myron Taylor. In reviewing the history of the Intergovernmental Committee, we must recognize that our original objectives were:

(1) to organize and hold a meeting of a committee consisting of the representatives of the 32 governments which had agreed to participate;

(2) to create a permanent organization;

(3) to persuade the representative of a foreign government, preferably the British Government since it has most to offer in the way of places of settlement, to serve as chairman;

(4) to secure the active collaboration of several of the principal governments through their acceptance of vice chairmanships, i. e. France, the Netherlands, Brazil, Argentina, in addition to the United States;

(5) to appoint a director and assistant director;

(6) to secure a British secretary;

(7) to establish a permanent office in London for the purposes (a) of undertaking negotiations with the German Government to effect an orderly emigration over a period of time which would permit the absorption of involuntary emigrants in countries of final settlement in reasonable circumstances and to arrange for the transfer of the assets of involuntary emigrants to the fullest extent possible in order that they might be more easily established in their new homes on a self supporting basis, and (b) of negotiating with the governments of the countries of settlement the establishment of involuntary emigrants in permanent homes.

We can record that the Intergovernmental Committee was established; that the permanent office was created with the desired personnel and that some progress has been made in negotiation with the countries of final settlement. In addition, through the Committee and the Director’s office the attention of the governments which had lagged but little behind the private organizations, has been focused on the urgency of the problem; the serious nature of the refugee situation has been kept before the public in the principal countries; the activity in behalf of refugees has been centralized; the committee has served as a focal point for the settlement of innumerable daily problems which added up make a splendid showing. Moreover, Rublee has been indefatigable in appraising the highly complex general problem and in formulating plans for the immediate infiltration of refugees and long range plans of settlement. No one has been turned away from the Director’s door, with the result that his office is perhaps between [better?] informed that [then?] any other agency on the daily developments in the refugee problem and the schemes which are afoot for its solution.

In the meantime, thousands of refugees have left Germany, some to obtain temporary refuge in the countries surrounding the Reich, others to proceed in small groups to places of final settlement. The British Government, which at the outset adopted a largely negative attitude, is now making a substantial contribution, taking children in large numbers from Germany, according refuge to transmigrants, absorbing selected persons at a rate which almost equals the rate of the American quota and opening up portions of its colonial empire to long range settlement. To this must be added the contributions of the Dominions. Thus, Canada is taking more of these persons than is generally known. Australia has decided to take immigrants at the rate of 5000 a year for the next 3 years and of this number at least 3000 a year will be involuntary emigrants from Germany and Austria. Other countries, which I shall not enumerate, have been making substantial contributions in the way of granting temporary refuge to transmigrants and of absorbing immigrants in greater numbers for final settlement.

In short, our Government’s initiative has materialized in a greater movement of refugees, a greater public interest and sympathy in the question, a greater showing of support of the private organizations in the form of contributions and a greater pressure on the governments to act.

We have encountered difficulty only with regard to the negotiations with Germany, but Schacht’s visit to London has removed this difficulty and laid the bases for negotiations with the German Government. Rublee, as you know, has been consulting the principal governments and is now assured of support to the extent that he has notified Schacht that he plans to be in Berlin on January 5 for the purpose of exploring with the German Government the methods of emigrating refugees from Germany in an orderly manner and of financing this emigration. The work of the Committee and its Director in the period immediately ahead is therefore clear. Rublee will explore every avenue of accord with the Germans and establish either that they will contribute a part to the general solution or that nothing positive is to be expected of them. I believe that Rublee should be given the freest possible hand in these conversations, since of course he must report any result back to the full Committee for the approval of the participating governments.

Rublee’s report, which will record success or partial success or no success, will form the subject matter of the full Committee meeting some time in January. If Rublee is successful the Committee will have to remain in session until agreement is reached between the participating governments on the terms of refuge and settlement of the involuntary emigrants who must leave Germany during the 3-year period proposed by Schacht. If Rublee has been unable to reach a satisfactory agreement with the Germans the Committee will have to determine how the outside nations are to deal, irrespective of action by Germany, with the refugee problem. In any event there will be adequate material for discussion so that the Committee will not have to fall back on general statement of facts which at best would constitute a repetition of the statements made at Evian.

The full Committee moreover will have to consider a reorganization of the machinery. Rublee made it plain to you and to me when he accepted the office of Director that he could only occupy this function for a limited period. He will wish to withdraw at the end of the German negotiation, that is to say after he has presented his report to the full Committee. A successor will have to be chosen and I believe that the other governments will expect us to indicate a choice.

In this connection we have reached the conclusion that the time has come to place a greater share of responsibility for the actual direction of the work of the Committee on British shoulders. Britain is the greatest colonial power and has the land available for settlement. London is the seat of the Committee. The city of London is best suited to the purposes of a refugee settlement and economic corporation. Winterton, it is true, is chairman but his position is largely honorary. What is needed is a British director who will assume real responsibility.

There is the further consideration that we have made the most of our contribution, namely, that we are taking a full quota of refugees from Germany and Austria. Unless we have something further to offer of a specific nature, and our instructions do not indicate that we have anything concrete in view, we shall be compelled to take a less conspicuous part in the search for places of settlement, although we shall still have a commanding position in the Committee through the vice chairmanship and vice directorship.

With these ideas in mind, we have looked over the field since my coming here and have been most impressed by the personality, experience and drive of the new League High Commissioner, Sir Herbert Emerson. He enjoys the full confidence of those in highest authority here, is a trained administrator (he was for many years Governor of the Punjab) and is mastering every detail of the refugee situation. We can think of no one better suited to continue Rublee’s work. The fact must not be overlooked, moreover, that to substitute a new man at this time who will be wholly unacquainted with the details of the problem would involve a waste of time, of money and possibly of human lives.

In making this recommendation, with which Rublee is in full accord, I do not overlook the fact that there is a certain difficulty from our point of view arising from the fact that Emerson is technically an official appointed by the League. What I propose, however, is that the functions of the Director of the Intergovernmental Committee and League Commissioner should be combined merely in the person of Emerson. The activities would be kept distinct. Emerson, on the one hand, would have his League offices and assistants to deal with questions relating to countries of refuge and liaison with the private organizations. On the other hand, Pell would continue, for a time at least, as Vice Director for the Intergovernmental Committee, maintaining the liaison with the governments of the countries of settlement. This solution would, it seems to me, contribute to greater efficiency, would avoid overlapping and duplication of authority and yet would preserve the independent and interdependent relationship of the Intergovernmental Committee and the League.

It must be kept in mind, furthermore, that the work of the Committee is about to enter upon a third stage where a large part of the work will be administrative and will have to be handled by a refugee, economic, or financial corporation which will carry on the great administrative task involved as well as the control of the vast funds which will be necessary for purposes of settlement. Clearly, whether Germany contributes a guarantee or not, such an organization, which might be called the International Resettlement Foundation, will have to be created. It will be a long term activity which should not fall on the shoulders of the governments.

I should appreciate it if you would give the solution outlined above your very careful consideration and inform me as soon as practicable whether it meets with your approval. I should like this information in order to take steps to come to an agreement with the British and others while Rublee is in Berlin in order that the full meeting of the Committee may hear not only Rublee’s report but receive a concrete recommendation with regard to its future work.

This telegram has the endorsement of Rublee and Pell. [Taylor.]

Johnson