767.68119 F&E 3/5: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Special Mission at Lausanne
41. Your 45, December 1, 10 a.m. and 60, December 5, 10 a.m.30 Following comments on the proposals for a change in the Turkish customs tariff regime31 are sent for your guidance:
(1) Reservation by the Turks of freedom to fix tariff during two-year interval pending conclusion of commercial treaties might be made the basis for obstructive tactics and discrimination during this period. The Department would naturally take the position that pending the conclusion of such an agreement with the United States the treaties and agreements now in force and customs privileges granted by such treaties and agreements or consecrated by usage would remain in force.
Recently this Government has consistently opposed tariffs levied in Turkey upon any basis other than 11 percent ad valorem established under treaties and agreements. Many of the specific tariffs established by Kemalists are understood to be far in excess of that rate. Should Turks revise their tariffs so that none except a few items which might be agreed upon after careful consideration, would [Page 919] exceed 15% or even 20% ad valorem, such tariffs, if accepted by other Powers, might not be opposed by this Government, pending conclusion within two years or possibly longer period of separate treaty on basis of economic autonomy for Turks under certain guarantees and most favored nation treatment for Americans. Discrimination against American products during period mentioned or adoption by Turks of obstructive tactics in treaty negotiations would probably be followed by insistence of this Government on pre-war tariffs.
(2) There is no objection in principle to the Turkish contention that commercial treaty between Turkey and Syria should not be considered as a basis for most favored nation treatment (this Government takes a similar view with regard to commercial treaties with Cuba), however, some provision would be desirable to prevent transshipment of goods from foreign countries through Syria in order to take advantage of particular arrangements with that country or similar arrangements which may possibly be made in future by Turkey with other States which in 1914 were a part of the Turkish Empire.
(3) The prohibitions noted under your point four32 would seem to permit of the inclusion of almost any type of article. It would be preferable to secure a limitation of such prohibition to more specific articles, such as foodstuffs, gold, opium, narcotics, et cetera.
(4) No objection to prohibition regarding importation of alcoholic products, and in general no objection to prohibition on importation unless tendency to discriminate against American products.
(5) Attention is called to difficulty already experienced in Constantinople with regard to consumption taxes which while in effect internal revenue measures in practice operate as additional customs dues. Turkey should guarantee national and most-favored-nation treatment with respect to all internal dues and taxes.
- Neither printed.↩
- For tariff proposals presented by the French delegation, see Conférence de Lausanne, etc., premiere série, tome iii, p. 233. For Turkish counterproposals, see ibid., p. 241.↩
- “4. During two-year period no prohibition except: (a) to preserve indispensable resources of alimentary nature and to assure the economic activity of the country; (b) in case economic regime of country endangered; (c) to assure security of the state; (d) to preserve persons, animals, plants against contagious diseases and epidemics; (e) opium and narcotics; (f) exportation of gold.”↩