665.001/10–2751
The Italian Embassy to the Department of State1
By the note dated June 6, 19492 addressed to the American, British and French Governments, the Italian Government had already expressed its views regarding the financial burdens of the Treaty of Peace, estimated at that time in the total amount of approximately two billion lire. Bearing in mind the clauses of the Peace Treaty with Japan and on the basis of an objective examination of the main economic clauses of the Italian Treaty of Peace and of the various bilateral agreements that Italy has stipulated with several nations, the following points are stressed:
[Page 732]I. Reparations.
A. By an established amount: Article 74 (sections A and B) imposes on Italy the payment of a total amount of 360 million dollars (about 225 billion lire) for reparations to the following nations: U.S.S.R. (100 million dollars), Greece (105), Yugoslavia (125), Albania (5), Ethiopia (25).
(a) Soviet Union: On December 11, 1948 Italy has reached with the U.S.S.R. a bilateral agreement stipulating that the 100 million dollars for reparations shall be paid with Italian property in Hungary, Rumania and Bulgaria and, if there should result a difference to Italy’s debit, with industrial supplies. The Mixed Commissions charged with the assessment of the property have not yet reached a basic understanding, as the property itself has been valued by the Italian experts in 177 million dollars and by the Russian experts in 11, 5 [garble]. An attempt was made to reach a compromise settlement through diplomatic negotiations, but neither in this case an agreement has been reached.
(b) Greece: The Governments of Italy and Greece, by the Agreement of August 31, 1948, have settled in a friendly way the question of reparations in the widest framework of economic cooperation between the two nations. This agreement represents a revision of the Treaty: the Italian Government intends to keep it in force.
(c) Yugoslavia: Also with Yugoslavia a bilateral agreement has been reached within the framework of economic and financial relations between the two countries. Through said agreement (December 23, 1950) the Italian Government has already placed at the disposal of the Yugoslav Government the amount of 30 million dollars and it has been agreed between the two Governments that no further payment should be made unless other mutual pending financial questions be settled, specifically the credits deriving from Italian property in Yugoslavia in general and also in ceded territories. This agreement is mutually satisfactory and the Italian Government intends to hold it in force.
(d) Albania: Owing to the considerable reasons of credit of Italy versus Albania, the Italian government has already notified the Albanian Government that it cannot consider the question of reparations unless in the frame of a general agreement.
(e) Ethiopia: Following the reestablishment of diplomatic relations, the Italian Government deems that the question of reparations might be settled on a friendly basis, as well as other pending questions, in the framework of relations and economic cooperation between the two countries.
B. Reparations for an unspecified amount (Art. 74 D and Art. 79). With the greater part of countries which the Treaty of Peace empowered to liquidate Italian property against claims of unspecified reparations, the question has already been settled through bilateral agreements which in certain cases have brought about the renunciation of such a power and in others the disclaim of such a right [Page 733] through the payment on the Italian side of global amounts agreed upon.
The problem is closely connected with the one arising out of Art. 79 of the Treaty: in fact this article authorizes the Allied and Associated Powers to avail themselves of Italian property in their respective territories not only as real and true reparations but also to satisfy outright undefined and unsettled claims on the basis of other clauses of the Treaty.
Actually, while certain nations have taken possession of Italian property to cover claims which were to be considered settled through the payment of reparations, others (such as Australia, Belgium, South Africa, India, Israel) are still holding under seizure such property as a guaranty of the settlement on Italy’s part of the obligations imposed by other provisions of the Treaty.
Italian property still held under seizure should be promptly released, bearing in mind that the claims against Italy of the nations holding said property as a guaranty might be settled on a friendly basis through open bilateral discussions.
II. Restitutions.
Italy has proceeded, as far as possible, to the restitution of property, according to article 75 of the Treaty of Peace, which war events have brought to the national territory and which is located there.
Moreover, the question has been settled with certain countries through bilateral agreements, and the Italian Government trusts that the restitution of other property which might be recovered be accepted in the condition it might be found.
III. Renunciation of Claims by Italy.
Through article 76 of the Treaty of Peace Italy had to renounce her claims for indemnity by the Allies connected with reasons directly or indirectly arising from the war (damages, requisition of property or services, seized merchant ships, etc.).
The economic results of such a renunciation are hardly calculable, but the Italian Government estimates the burden in the amount of at least 500 billions.
The Italian Government deems that a revision could be made of the provisions of article 76 which conflict with the normal practice of international law, and that the extent of said article, in so far as it concerns the indemnification for requisitions and for war damages, could be limited to the damages suffered in Italian territory with the exclusion, for instance, of the requisitions of property and services effected in the former colonies.
[Page 734]IV. Compensation for Losses and Damages to Allied Property (articles 78 and 83).
In view of the treatment accorded Japan and which probably will be extended to Germany, it would be equitable to provide that the amount of indemnity due for losses and war damages suffered by nationals of the United Nations be established by the Italian law; that the obligation for indemnification by the Italian Government be not extended to losses and damages suffered in former Italian colonies; that further the Commissions of Conciliation be abolished and that their jurisdiction on this subject be transferred to the Italian administrative and judicial authorities; that, finally, a date be firmly and definitely established for the presentation of claims under the articles above mentioned.
Prize Courts Judgments (Annex XVII–A)
Also in view of the obligation imposed on Italy by art. 76 to acknowledge, in every case, as valid and effective the decisions of the Prize Courts of Allied and Associated Powers on Italian ships and goods, it seems equitable to abolish Annex XVII-A, which gives instead to the aforesaid Powers the right to request the revision of similar judgments of the Italian Prize Courts.
Bearing in mind the foregoing, the Italian Government deems it equitable to establish the following points:
a) that Italian property be considered the maximum limit for reparation claims—specified or unspecified—on the part of the Allied and Associated Powers which have not renounced them and with which bilateral agreements have not yet been reached. Besides, on such basis, the Italian Government is still ready to reach bilateral agreements with the other Governments concerned, provided they declare themselves willing to take into consideration the reasons which account for Italian credit. Moreover, that those governments which, although having renounced the right to use Italian property as a source of reparations still hold it as guaranty, might return it to the lawful owners, giving credit to the Italian Government for the carrying out of its obligations;
b) that, on the subject of restitutions, no other burden should weigh on the Italian Treasury apart from the one of transportation of property which might be recovered in Italy;
c) that the matter of renunciation be adequately revised, specifically for what concerns the non extension thereof to the territories of the former Italian colonies;
d) that the obstacles standing in the way for a settlement of pending economic and financial questions with Germany be removed;
e) that the question of compensation for property losses and damages in Italy of citizens of the United Nations be revised;
f) that the revision of the judgments of the Prize Courts will not be required from Italy.