500.A15A4 Steering Committee/159: Telegram
The American Delegate (Wilson) to the Secretary of State
[Received November 17—6:25 p.m.]
462. Following is a résumé of an address by Sir John Simon31 before the Bureau this morning in a special session on the subject of the return of Germany to the Conference and certain suggestions regarding disarmament.
Sir John prefaced his remarks by pointing out that his delegation was not yet prepared to comment upon the French plan nor would it have any detailed plan of its own to present since its immediate concern was with a précis matter which should be effectively dealt with as a condition precedent to the adoption of any detailed plan. This premise is to find the basis upon which the claim to equality of rights could be dealt with. The objective elements of this immediate problem were, he explained, as follows:
- 1.
- There must be no modification of the Treaty of Versailles save by general agreement. In this connection he made his sole comment upon the French plan to the effect that it contained a proposal relating to method of recruitment which would involve a modification of part 5 of the treaty.
- 2.
- By general understanding in 1919 Germany’s disarmament was the precursor of a substantial measure of general disarmament.
- 3.
- Other nations of the world are not as yet under any contractual obligations to limit or reduce their arms (save by the naval treaties) and they are still permitted weapons for war which are prohibited to Germany.
- 4.
- The hesitation regarding the acceptance of Germany’s thesis proceeds from the fear of the dangers resulting from this new situation created thereby.
Concrete propositions could be derived from situation:
- (a)
- All European states should join in a solemn affirmation that they will not in any circumstances attempt to resolve any present or future differences between them by resort to force.
- (b)
- The limitations on Germany’s armaments should be contained in the general convention defining the limitations on the armaments of others.
- (c)
- The newly expressed limitations in the case of Germany would extend over the same period and be subject to the same methods of revision as those for all countries.
- (d)
- The British Government declares its willingness to accept as regards application to Germany the principles of qualitative equality which refers to the kind of arms rather than to their quantity.
In proposing a first stage for the actual program of this Disarmament Conference, he suggested certain methods which might be applied in this first stage and considered that a few years of good neighborly conduct will do much to prepare the way for the second stage which concerns political difficulties.
These concrete suggestions relate to (1) qualitative and (2) quantitative disarmament and (3) the question of supervision and control. Under the first heading, as regards naval armaments, Great Britain proposes to permit Germany to build capital ships of a tonnage to which the great naval powers can agree to reduce theirs. Any construction undertaken by Germany should not, however, increase the total tonnage in any category of its navy. Great Britain proposes to limit cruisers to vessels of 7, 000 tons with 6–inch guns and to abolish submarines. In respect of land armaments heavy tanks should be abolished, Germany being granted in principle the right to a limited number of small tanks. Large mobile guns may only be replaced by those of a calibre permitted Germany (105 millimeter). The British proposals concerning air armaments envisage the eventual abolition of military and naval machines and of bombing, combined with an effective international control of civil aviation. As a preliminary measure to achieve this end it proposes immediate reduction of all air forces to the level of the United Kingdom, which now is fifth in size, and thereafter a cut of 33 1/3 percent of all the reduced air forces, plus a limitation of the unladen weight of military air craft to the lowest figure possible. Pending the examination of the more far reaching proposals Sir John considered that Germany should refrain from making any claim to possess military or naval aircraft.
In the realm of quantitative disarmament any readjustment of Germany’s forces which follows from the recognition of its claims for equality of treatment should be carried out in such a way as not to involve any increase “of Germany’s powers of military aggression”. Favorably impressed by the Hoover proposals relating to military effectives, he reiterated that Great Britain is prepared to accept them in principle as a basis for discussion.
Subject to the conditions being accepted by all states represented at Geneva, Great Britain is prepared to provide for effective supervision of the execution of the convention.
[Page 397]Henderson then devoted a short speech to the necessity of bringing about Germany’s return to the Conference and emphasized that the time had come when the-question of equality of status must be solved. He felt that both the British and French suggestions contained proposals enabling the Conference an equable solution of this question. Any discussion upon it should clearly recognize the necessity of including the limitation of Germany’s armaments in the same convention as those imposed upon all countries. He concluded with the earnest expression of hope that the German Government would decide at an early date that its delegation would rejoin the Conference.
In associating himself on behalf of Italy with Henderson’s conclusions concerning the necessity of resolving Germany’s claim to equality of rights, Rosso pointed out that it would be illusory, if not dangerous, to hope to attain any settlement of the important disarmament problems in the absence of Germany. Principle of equality claimed by Germany must be applied through reduction of the levels of the armaments of the most heavily armed countries and not by the re-armament of others.
Massigli in welcoming the British proposals stated on behalf of his Government that it confirmed its previous memoranda dealing with the question of providing means for insuring Germany’s reentry. He associated himself with Henderson’s expression of hope.
Mr. Davis then made the statement contained in my 46132 and was followed by the representatives of Poland, Belgium, Russia, Switzerland, Czechoslovakia and Austria who all associated themselves with the expressions of the President.33 Indeed the speech by the Soviet representative was the most conciliatory in tone that has issued from that delegation in the 4 years of their participation.