665.001/10–1551
Memorandum of Conversation, by the Director of the Office of Western European Affairs (Byington)1
Subject: Italian Peace Treaty
| Participants: | Mr. Mario Luciolli, Italian Embassy |
| Mr. K. D. Jamieson, British Embassy | |
| Mr. P. Francfort, French Embassy | |
| Mr. Homer M. Byington, Jr.—WE | |
| Mr. Howard J. Hilton, Jr.—WE |
The meeting was arranged at Mr. Luciolli’s request in order that he might present the Italian Government’s draft of its proposed Note to all signatories of the Italian Peace Treaty. A copy of the draft which he gave to those present is attached.2
Mr. Luciolli explained the objectives of the Italian Government in this draft as follows: Since the Italian Note, in the eyes of the Italian Government, is to be essentially a political document, it should be as short as possible and should emphasize the political rather than the military aspects of the Italian request. The Italian Government had, therefore, slightly recast the Note to emphasize the political rather than the military aspects, and had shortened it considerably to achieve these objectives. The redraft does not depart, however, from the substance of the longer draft communicated to the Italian Government on September 22. A copy of this draft is attached to Memorandum of Conversation of that date.3
After reviewing the draft, I said that this seemed to conform to the draft originally presented, and that on an informal basis, I could say that it was acceptable but would have to obtain final clearance. Both Mr. Francfort and Mr. Jamieson indicated that they would seek instructions from their respective Foreign Offices. As an off-the-cuff reaction, Mr. Jamieson remarked that one change in substance might be involved in the deletion of the request [Page 726] “that each of the Allied and Associated Powers waive Italy’s obligations to it under Articles 15–18 and Articles 46–70 with relevant annexes of the Italian Peace Treaty”. In commenting on this thought, Mr. Luciolli said that the Italian Government would undoubtedly be pleased to add that request and inquired if it should be added at this time; however, Mr. Jamieson indicated that he would prefer to seek instructions from the Foreign Office on the draft as presented without endeavoring to make any drafting changes in the language.
The British wrote the first draft of the proposed Italian Note and gave copies to representatives of the French and United States Governments on September 17. After some initial changes in wording, a copy of the proposed note was given to the Italians on September 22 for their evaluation. Numerous meetings were held in the next few weeks to discuss including a reference in the note to Article 18 which concerned peace treaties with the satellite countries; after much discussion, it was decided to omit this reference. The memoranda of these conferences are in file 665.001.
Mr. Luciolli then said that with reference to the economic clauses, he wished to state informally that the Italian Government hoped that some arrangements could be made to remove the discriminations implicit in certain of those provisions. He mentioned specifically:
(1) the establishment of a time limit during which claims might be presented and,
(2) certain changes in the provisions relating to the Conciliation Commission which would be more in accord with general principles of international law.
To these suggestions I replied that such proposals should not in any way be associated with the present procedure for revision of the Italian Peace Treaty. In reply, Mr. Luciolli said that would be the case but indicated that the Italian Government was presently preparing some proposals covering the economic clauses.
I asked Mr. Luciolli what were the plans of the Italian Government with regard to the timing of the Note. He said that the Italian Government would like to send the Note to all signatories as soon as approval had been given by the three governments. It was agreed that an effort would be made to secure agreement as promptly as possible on the text of the Note which might then be sent to all signatories.
After Mr. Luciolli departed, Mr. Francfort remarked that there seemed to be some misunderstanding on the part of Mr. Luciolli regarding the nature of the “new understanding”. I expressed the view that we were all agreed that the “new understanding” would consist of our reply to the Italian Note and the Italian acceptance. I added that I thought this was fully understood by Mr. Luciolli, but would mention it again on the occasion of our next meeting. Mr. Francfort, with reference to Mr. Luciolli’s comments on economic provisions, expressed concern that the Italian Government might contemplate the injection of these questions in connection with the “new understanding”. I pointed out in this connection that the test of the Italian intention was represented by the draft Note which had been presented. Since it made no reference to economic [Page 727] provisions, I felt that the Italian Government did not intend to raise economic questions in connection with this procedure for revision of the Italian Treaty. I added that the Italian Government could be expected to raise the question of economic provisions on every suitable occasion, but in our opinion, the present action on the Italian Peace Treaty did not provide a suitable occasion, Mr. Francfort expressed his agreement with this view.