Foreign Relations of the United States Diplomatic Papers, 1936, General, British Commonwealth, Volume I

740.0011 Mutual Guarantee (Locarno)/858

The Ambassador in Belgium (Morris) to the Secretary of State

No. 1094

Brussels, December 19, 1936.
[Received January 9, 1937.]

Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of the Department’s telegram No. 46, of December 16, 6 p.m., 1936,³⁷ directing the Embassy to forward at once by mail full digests of the notes which the British Government recently sent to the other Powers concerning a proposed Western Pact. In compliance with the Department’s instructions, there are transmitted herewith by the first available pouch:

(1) A digest of the British note of September 17, 1936, to Belgium, France, Germany and Italy.

(2) A digest of the replies of Belgium, France, Germany and Italy to the British note of September 17, 1936. These replies were collated in a note addressed by Great Britain to Belgium, France, Germany and Italy on November 4, 1936.

(3) A digest of the British note of November 19, 1936.

The enclosed digests are made from notes which a member of the Embassy (Mr. Sussdorff) took from the original documents during a conversation with a member of the British Embassy in Brussels. Inasmuch as the notes of the British Government and the replies of the Belgian, French, German and Italian Governments are long documents, it was only possible, in the short space of time available, to make excerpts and digests of the main points.

Respectfully yours,

Dave H. Morris

[Enclosure 1]

Memorandum by the Counselor of Embassy in Belgium (Sussdorff)

Referring to the joint communiqué issued by the British, French and Belgian Governments after the one day meeting of their representatives in London on July 23, 1936, concerning the desirability of a Five Power Meeting to discuss the question of a new Western Pact to replace the Treaty of Locarno, to the communication which the British Government addressed on behalf of Great Britain, France and Belgium to the Governments of Germany and Italy and to the German and Italian replies, the British Government, in its note of September 17, 1936, again expressed the earnest hope that a meeting of representatives of Great Britain, France, Belgium, Germany and Italy could be held at the earliest possible date.

In its note of September 17, 1936, the British Government suggested to the four other Governments that, in its opinion, a consideration of the following points would be useful:

(1) “What is to be the form of the new agreement to take the place of the Treaty of Locarno, i. e. will it include (a) non-aggression arrangements between certain Powers, and, if so, between which Powers; and (b) provisions guaranteeing those non-aggression arrangements, and, if so, which Powers will give and receive the guarantees and how will they operate?”

(2) Will it be necessary to make special provisions in the new agreement for an air attack?

(3) Should the new agreement contain provisions for arbitration and conciliation, as does the Treaty of Locarno?

In order to clarify its position and to advance the discussion, the British Government then set forth its views on the above questions as follows:

(1) Non-aggression agreements. The British Government expressed the opinion that in any new Western Pact provision should be made that the question of determining the aggressor should be submitted to the Council of the League of Nations. In the event of the flagrant violation of a frontier the guarantees might operate immediately pending a final pronouncement by the League Council.

(2) A special provision might be inserted in the proposed Western Pact for immediate assistance in the event of an air attack which constituted a violation of the non-aggression undertakings. This would obviate the necessity of a separate air pact.

(3) The new agreement should contain provisions for arbitration and conciliation as did the Treaty of Locarno.

[Enclosure 2]

Memorandum by the Counselor of Embassy in Belgium (Sussdorff)

The Belgian note of October 22, 1936, in substance marked complete agreement with the British note of September 17, 1936. The principal points contained in the Belgian note were:

(1) Appreciation was expressed that Great Britain had not asked Belgium to be a guarantor.

(2) Belgium’s contribution would lie in the agreement to defend its own territory.

(3) Belgium would also contribute to a program of collective security under the League of Nations.

(4) For more than a year Belgium has been interested in an air agreement and will contribute in an air program.

(5) Belgium agrees to arbitration and conciliation provisions in any new Western Pact.

The principal points contained in the French note of September 30, 1936, were:

(1) The provisions of the Locarno Treaty should be maintained in the proposed Western Pact with the modifications required by circumstances.

(2) The status quo of France’s and Belgium’s frontiers with Germany should be maintained.

(3) Each contracting Power to agree not to attack any other contracting Power by land, sea or air.

(4) In case of attack, guarantees of assistance not less effective than under the Treaty of Locarno.

(5) France is ready to serve as a guarantor to all parties to the new pact on the basis of reciprocity.

(6) France has no objection to including Holland in the new pact in accordance with Germany’s suggestion.

(7) The contemplated new pact might be the prelude to larger negotiations which would presuppose the collaboration of all the interested Powers.

The following are the main points contained in the German reply of October 12, 1936:

(1) The subject matter of the new negotiations should be confined in scope to a new Locarno agreement, including the question of attacks by air. Other problems only to be discussed when the question of a new Treaty to replace Locarno is concluded.

(2) The structure of the new pact would naturally have to take into account the political developments which have given rise to the plan for such a pact.

(3) The German Government has already declared itself prepared for a renunciation of aggression vis-à-vis France and Belgium unrestricted by any exceptions.

(4) The German Government does not consider it necessary or appropriate to submit to the Council of the League of Nations the question of deciding whether an infringement of the obligation of non-aggression has taken place and consequently whether the guarantee obligation has entered into force.

It will be necessary to examine whether such decisions should not be reached by a common decision of the parties to the Treaty who are not, in a given case, parties to the Treaty.

(5) The obligations of the Treaty will apply to attack by air. But the German Government shares the British Government’s view-point that a separate air pact is not necessary.

The Italian reply, which was undated, was rather brief. The principal points raised were:

(1) Italy believes that the old Locarno Treaty should be used as a model and should be re-examined in the light of present circumstances.

(2) In regard to the form of the guarantees, Italy prefers a joint Anglo-Italian guarantee. Italy believes that separate guarantees would weaken the whole plan of security by establishing two tripartite systems: one Franco-Anglo-German and one Italy-Franco-German.

The replies of the four Governments as set forth above were collated by the British Government in its note of November 4, 1936.

[Enclosure 3]

Memorandum by the Counselor of Embassy in Belgium (Sussdorff)

In a further note, dated November 19, 1936, the British Government addressed certain supplementary views to the Governments of Belgium, France, Germany and Italy on the basis of the communication of views contained in the notes of the four Governments. In its note of November 19, 1936, the British Government raised the following points:

(1) In the proposed Western Pact it asked for a guarantee for Great Britain from both France and Germany.

(2) Question of the aggressor. The British Government again expressed the opinion that only one body is adapted to deciding this question—namely, the Council of the League of Nations.

(3) Insistence was again laid on the importance of a subsequent meeting of other interested Powers in the event of the settlement of the question of a new Western Pact.

37. Not printed.