862.811/42: Telegram
The Ambassador in Germany (Dodd) to the Secretary of State
[Received November 16—3:02 p.m.]
335. Germany’s action on Saturday (which we did not report as fully covered by American press) in denouncing unilaterally part [Page 373] XII of the Versailles treaty relating to German waterways23 was not played up in the local press. Curiously enough reports only appeared on interior pages of the newspapers. Rumors of this action have been bruited about for some months and we believe already discounted in Europe.
The text of the note24 delivered to the countries directly concerned is not available here either through the Foreign Office or from the missions. The communiqué issued to the press was confined to a general statement to the effect that provisions regulating German waterways emanating from the Versailles treaty were no longer regarded as binding upon Germany. It was announced that shipping on German waterways remains open to vessels of all states at peace with Germany and no discrimination.
The communiqué is vague in that the internationalization of several of the waterways in question existed prior to the war and consequently it is not clear exactly what their status will be in the future. However it is anticipated that this action will be followed by negotiations with the interested states. In this connection Germany may wish to have freedom of action for the purpose of playing favorites with respect to river traffic through Germany.
Superficially the reason for the German action is clear as being a further elimination of the restrictions of Versailles treaty. We are puzzled, however, as to what if any significance this denunciation entails since it strikes us as rather odd that the particular moment would be chosen for a move which evidently has no especial internal value as witnessed by the character of the press announcements. Nor would the action appear immediately to jeopardize any international situation.25
Czechoslovakia is probably the most directly concerned and in certain respects Saturday’s action may tend to confirm paragraph 2 of Embassy’s 332, November 14, noon. We have informally discussed the unilateral denunciation with the Czech Legation who state they also are puzzled as to its real significance if any. They feel it will have little practical effect on them since Germany has confirmed their rights to free port facilities at Hamburg and Stettin. There is the question of payment for Elbe River traffic, however, which was free under the treaty. After investigation this may cause Czechoslovakia [Page 374] to reroute a certain or perhaps large portion of her exports via Trieste. Confidentially the Czechoslovak Legation states that Italy has lately been offering facilities to get this trade away from German transit. Likewise confidentially the Czechoslovak Legation states that they understand Hungary is not pleased with the action since river internationalization fits her book best with regard to the Danube.
Cipher text mailed to London, Paris, Praha.
- Foreign Relations, The Paris Peace Conference, 1919, vol. xiii, p. 647.↩
- The official German announcement and note were published in Reichs gesetzblatt, pt. II, No. 43, November 26, 1936; for English text, see Documents on International Affairs, 1936, p. 283.↩
- A few mild protests were lodged with the German Foreign Office, and on November 16 in the House of Commons the British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs expressed his regret at Germany’s unilateral action; for text of statement, see United Kingdom, Parliamentary Debates, House of Commons, 5th series, vol. 317 (1936–1937), pp. 1334–1335.↩