665.001/7–751: Telegram
The Ambassador in France (Bruce) to the Secretary of State 1
138 Fr views with respect revision Italian peace treaty (Deptel 6143 to London June 26, rptd Paris 7104,2 London’s 98 to Dept July 6, rptd Paris 31, Rome 53) were informally discussed with Emb officer by Boegner, chief FonOff Southern Eur Div, who said more thorough presentation Fr counterproposals will be made by Fr Emb Washn. Fr are not adverse to removal of restrictions and [Page 630] disabilities from Italy, but prefer that this be done without formal revision, largely because of doubts as to how contemplated revision cld be accomplished without placing us more in the wrong than if we facilitated and tolerated de facto setting-aside of such restrictions.
FonOff legal experts for instance have pointed out that we made major point at Danube conference that revision of treaties must have consent of all signatories, and although such recent precedents are not considered controlling, FonOff evidently attaches importance to them. Method whereby in absence of Sov agreement we proceed to revise treaty without them wld, in Fr view, quite aside from legal dubiousness, confer no advantages upon ourselves and Italians that their more pragmatic approach wld not bring.
Fr wld merely have Ministers issue joint declaration expressing desirability of allowing Italy to make contribution to Western defense and becoming more closely associated with such defense. If Sovs subsequently protest when Italians proceed beyond treaty limits on basis of our declaration, we wld reject such protest, Boegner said, by well-documented reference to satellite treaty violations.
One factor in FonOff position according to Boegner is their differing appreciation of Italian public opinion, which in Fr view is not much concerned with legal principles involved in treaty revision. According to FonOff’s info, association with Western defense considered by Italian public opinion to be matter of practice rather than of political rights.4 By contrast, Trieste issue is one which finds Italian public opinion according to FonOff extremely alert and sensitive to political and legal considerations.
- Repeated to London and Rome.↩
- Telegram 6143 repeated the text ot telegram 5876 to Rome, June 25, to Paris and London. (665.001/6–2651) Telegram 5876 stated that informal, secret consultations with the British and French Embassies in Washington had begun concerning the revision of the Italian Peace Treaty and that the substance of these discussions would not be revealed to the Italians. (665.001/5–2851)↩
- Telegram 98 reported that the British Foreign Office felt that revision of the Italian Peace Treaty should be done by means of bilateral agreements between Italy and the other treaty signatories because this method was less provocative to the Soviets than the one suggested by the United States. (665.001/7–651)↩
- On July 17, the Embassy in Paris reported in telegram 356 that the French Foreign Ministry was considering proposing that the U.N. General Assembly deal with the matter of the revision of the Italian Peace Treaty because of the Soviet veto of Italy’s membership in the United Nations. This recommendation had not yet received the approval of Schuman. (665.001/7–1751)↩