767.68119P/56: Telegram
The Special Mission at Lausanne to the Secretary of State
[Received June 14—4:23 a.m.]
422. Your telegram 180 of June 11.
- 1.
- I shall discuss with Ismet the desirability of the Turks addressing to the United States a voluntary statement setting forth the principles which are embodied in articles 36 to 44 omitting the reference in article 43 to supervision by the League. I believe, however, that the appropriate time to bring up this matter will come at a later stage of our treaty negotiations. If I try to pave the way in the various conversations I am having with Ismet there will be a better chance of securing such a declaration. If I should make the suggestion now there would be the danger of a definite refusal.
- 2.
- We reminded the Turkish delegation yesterday that it was our definite understanding that they should make to the United States a statement concerning property and institutions not less favorable than that arranged with the Allies. We added that it was conceivable that the Turks might desire to be more generous in their statement to us. They told us that at the appropriate time Ismet would answer, but that probably the statement would be identical with that made to the Allies, as the Turks would be embarrassed in their relations with the Allies were there to be a variation.
- 3.
- While the judicial declaration79 will be an instrument of the treaty of peace between Turkey and the Allies its provisions will apply to all nations, being addressed to no nation or nations in particular.
We have not been able to have alterations made in the phrases “European judicial advisers” and “whom it will select from among jurists nationals of countries which did not take part in the war of 1914–18”. On several occasions, however, Ismet has indicated that Turkey would not be prevented by the judicial declaration from appointing other advisers than those provided in the declaration to assist her in working out her domestic problems and that considering their political disinterestedness Americans would in all probability be chosen as advisers. The jealousy of the Allies would be aroused by any change in the present wording of the declaration and any such change would also open the way for insistence by the Soviet Government upon a Russian adviser, which could not be tolerated. In declining to address a separate declaration to the United States the Turks offered the same arguments. See our telegrams 263 of April 27 and 315 of May 11.80
I had a confidential discussion of this question some time ago with Montagna who is the foreign delegate inclined to be most in sympathy with us. He told me that he personally, and probably the Italian Government, would heartily favor providing for an American adviser in the declaration but that unquestionably the other Allies would suspect us of seeking to gain an “inside track”. This would lead to friction, suspicion, and embarrassment, weakening our position at the conference. Montagna strongly advised me therefore not to proceed with this project. With both the Turks and Allies opposed I do not feel it possible to have the desired provision inserted in the declaration, and that the better way will be to take the matter up through diplomatic channels after the signing of the peace treaty.