Papers Relating to the Foreign Relations of the United States, 1923, Volume II

711.672/126: Telegram

The Secretary of State to the Special Mission at Lausanne

[Paraphrase]

Washington, July 22, 1923—11 p.m.

255. The impression conveyed by Mission’s 549 of July 21⁹³ and 550 of July 22 is that the Turkish delegate is trying to rush you into assenting to his terms. His declarations that he cannot recede from the position he has taken on any point, that his proposals are final, and that this is his last word, appear to be a sort of ultimatum. If they are so intended you should make it clear that the tone which has been introduced into the negotiations has not made a favorable impression on the Government of the United States. We have not been at war with the Ottoman Empire, and we have demonstrated our good will toward the new government in Turkey by adopting its suggestion that, in preparation for the resumption of normal relations, a new treaty of amity and commerce be negotiated. Although during the past weeks the American representatives have been holding themselves at the disposal of Ismet Pasha for the discussion of the new treaty, this Government has refrained from pressing its affairs upon him out of consideration for his preoccupation with the task of making peace with the Allies which has first claim upon his time. (At this point you could give an exact exposition of the situation.) Now, however, after consuming eight months in negotiations with the Allies, he consents to remain in Lausanne for only two days for the purpose of concluding the negotiations with the United States which were undertaken at his instance. He has indicated, moreover, that the tentative agreements between the American and Turkish experts are to be withdrawn. (See particularly the Turkish proposal reported in Mission’s 432, June 16.⁹³) And he has coupled with this intimation a statement rather unpleasantly suggestive of an ultimatum. The Government of the United States finds itself obliged to state that it feels no pressing necessity to negotiate under these conditions.

The Department is willing, however, to have you proceed with the negotiations if Ismet Pasha is prepared to discuss with you in a spirit of conciliation the questions which remain unsettled. The Department also wishes you to state emphatically that while this Government is willing to discuss all questions in a spirit of reasonableness, to the end that a mutually satisfactory settlement may be reached, yet if the negotiations should break down it will find itself under the necessity of insisting that the existing treaties with Turkey, including the capitulations, are to be regarded as still in force pending a new treaty, and that its relations with Turkey will be governed by that view. This attitude of the United States Government should be brought forcefully to the attention of Ismet Pasha, as also the surprise of this Government that he is apparently indifferent to the due conclusion of negotiations which were undertaken on his initiative.

You should refute Ismet’s contention that our apparent effort to get from him more than the Allies received has occasioned difficulties, by pointing out that there is no indication of such an effort in the mere fact that the wording of our proposed treaty differs in part from that of the corresponding articles in the Allied treaty. The legislation of the Allies and their relations with Turkey differ from those of the United States and call for different arrangements. Nor are Ismet’s charges supported by the fact that we are seeking definite agreements upon certain issues which the Allies have chosen to leave for future settlements (namely the right to practice the professions). The Allies, moreover, are obtaining very important territorial and political settlements, while this Government does not seek provisions of that sort.

In expressing the willingness of this Government to conclude a consular convention, you should also point out that we have done more than the Allies were prepared to do, and we may reasonably hope, therefore, that on other points the Turkish Government will give due consideration to the views of the United States.

The Department has the following observations to make on Ismet Pasha’s statement of his position:

1. It is assumed by the Department in regard to the articles on establishment that it was our article 2 to which Ismet’s comments related. Is it his meaning that the texts as given in your 432 of June 16 and which the Turks had proposed are now to be definitely refused by the Turks? With regard to article 2 the Department is ready to assent to that proposal, provided a slight modification is made in the last paragraph in accordance with formula in Department’s 170 and 231,⁹⁵ and in order to meet conditions regarding real property in the United States. If the Turkish delegation declines to accept the formula which they have themselves proposed you should let it be known that we on our side must withdraw the consular articles, which seem to have special value in the eyes of the Turks. You could then carry on the negotiations on the basis of the Allied establishment convention, articles 2–4, making special provision as above in the matter of real property.

2. You may omit the whole of the article on naturalization if the Turks will not accept the formula suggested in Department’s 230 of July 10.⁹⁶

3. Do Ismet’s remarks on the capitulations signify that the Turks now reject the text of their own counterproposal of the 8th of March?⁹⁷ (Department’s 220 of July 6, third paragraph.⁹⁶) You should make every effort to have that formula accepted. You are also particularly directed to avoid use of word “accept”, and to keep the words “High Contracting Parties”. But the Department will not absolutely refuse to accept the formula accepted by the Allies, and the negotiations should not be broken off over the phrasing of the formula.

4. The Department does not clearly understand the proposal regarding claims. If it is proposed to exclude only those claims which arise from injury under foreign occupation, the Department would not be unwilling to accept the proposal, provided it is satisfactory in other respects, and would be willing to accept provision releasing the Turkish Government from responsibility for injuries occurring under foreign occupation. If, however, the injuries result from acts or negligence of the Turkish authorities, even though it can be shown that there existed some relation between the conduct of the Turkish authorities and the fact of foreign occupation, the Department would not in that case be willing to release the Turkish Government from responsibility. The assets to which Turkey has given up its rights, in return for discharge of claims against Turkey by the Allied Powers, far exceed in value the sum of the claims which the United States is disposed to press against Turkey. A sum of between $12,000,000 and $15,000,000 would cover the claims filed with the Department. In view of the fact that the Turks have already renounced their rights in favor of the Allies to nearly $60,000,000, in settlement of claims against Turkey, they might be prepared to turn over to the United States a lump sum in settlement of all American claims arising before the agreement shall have come into force; the task of satisfying individual claimants would be left to the Government of the United States. For a lump sum of $5,000,000, received in payments over a term of years, the Department would agree to discharge Turkey from all liability. This suggestion should be advanced only if you think you can settle on these terms.

5. If you cannot do better, you may accept from the Turks a judicial declaration in exactly the same form as the one presented to the Allies.

6. It should not be necessary to break off negotiations for a general treaty because of failure to persuade Turks to address a letter to us on minorities. It is difficult to see, however, why the Turks are reluctant to adopt suggestion in Department’s 247 of July 20. Perhaps they would be willing to let you see the full text of the National Pact and to point out the particular article which relates to minorities.

7. With regard to institutions, the Department is disposed to accept a letter identical with the one addressed to the Allies.

8. The Department does not regard the declaration on sanitation as of paramount importance to the United States. Our own quarantine regulations and the exercise of a proper vigilance by American consuls in issuing bills of health should sufficiently protect the interests of this country. Apparently the Department has made no earlier communications to you on this subject, but it assumes that the declaration given in the Turkish counterproposal on article 129 is the one to which you refer. In case the Public Health Service has expressed, through General Blue, the importance of receiving a declaration on sanitation, you should make every proper endeavor to secure it.

9. The Department has no observations to make on the question of the Straits.

10. It is not clear to which aspect of the tax question you have reference.

The Department assumes after reading your telegram that it is not the wish of the Turks to omit from all articles of the treaty any application of the principle of most-favored-nation treatment. It would be necessary, for instance, in article 9⁹⁸ to receive assurance of most-favored-nation treatment in regard to import duties.

Hughes

93. Not printed.
93. Not printed.
95. Neither printed.
96. Not printed.

97. The following is a translation of article 26 of the Turkish counterproposal, as transmitted in a despatch from the Special Mission at Lausanne, dated at Paris, Mar. 20, 1923:

    “The High Contracting Parties declare completely abrogated the capitulations concerning the regime of foreigners in Turkey both as regards conditions of entry and residence and as regards fiscal and judicial questions, and likewise the economic and financial system resulting from the capitulations.”

96. Not printed.
98. See draft for long form of treaty, p. 1080.