I have approved this joint resolution because it was intended as an expression of the fixed desire of the Government and the people of the United States to avoid any action which might involve us in war. The purpose is wholly excellent, and this joint resolution will to a considerable degree serve that end. It provides for a licensing system for the control of carrying arms, et cetera, by American vessels; for the control of the use of American waters by foreign submarines; for the restriction of travel by American citizens on vessels of belligerent nations; and for the embargo of the export of arms, et cetera, to both belligerent nations. The latter section terminates at the end of February 1936. This section requires further and more complete consideration between now and that date. Here again the objective is wholly good. It is the policy of this Government to avoid being drawn into wars between other nations, but it is a fact that no Congress and no Executive can foresee all possible future situations. History is filled with unforeseeable situations that call for some flexibility of action. It is conceivable that situations may arise in which the wholly inflexible provisions of section I of this act might have exactly the opposite effect from that which was intended. In other words, the inflexible provisions might drag us into war instead of keeping us out. The policy of the Government is definitely committed to the maintenance of peace and the avoidance of any entanglements which would lead us into conflict. At the same time it is the policy of the Government by every peaceful means and without entanglement to cooperate with other similarly minded governments to promote peace. In several aspects further careful consideration of neutrality needs is most desirable, and there can well be an expansion to include provisions dealing with other important aspects of our neutrality policy which have not been dealt with in this temporary measure. 51 765.84/1101 The Ambassador in Italy (Long) to the Secretary of State [Telegram: Paraphrase] ROME, September 10, 1935-6 p.m. 567. In my mind there remains no vestige of doubt that Italy is irrevocably determined to proceed in Africa and that from whatever quarter opposition is offered it will be met by subjected mass attack. I am convinced from my contacts with the people, from reports of the attitude of the man on the street and from my observation of the antipathy to England on the part of the soldier and the civilian that the whole population, both military and civilian, are in complete accord with Mussolini's policies as they have been developed up to now and as they are prospected for the future. The press in every issue gives additional expression to the national determination to proceed to war and not to tolerate interference from any source. The Italian plans have developed step by step over a period of many months. Now they find themselves with more than 200,000 men south of the Suez Canal and there are more than three more divisions preparing to go. The withdrawal of those troops would be a defeat and its effect upon the government here a disaster. Hurried on by a gradually approaching domestic economic crisis I have a distinct impression that opposition from England would be welcomed by the Italians as an opportunity for the demonstration of their imaginary and even possible superior strength in the Eastern part of the Mediterranean. Malta is only a few minutes by air from the Italian posts in Sicily, and Cairo, Alexandria, and Port Said are only an hour removed from the Libyan coast. The Italian press is heaping abuse upon those who have the courage to stand up in Geneva and give expression to thought opposing the Italian aims; it also castigates French and British socialists who dare to speak of sanctions and inveighs against the united opposition of bolshevism and the "piracy of plutocracy", as they designate the Rickett affair, and charges that all of these are joined in a worthless attempt to stop the progress of Italy. I have the impression that the Italians are quite willing to accept the delay which has been occasioned by the Geneva meetings since they are thus afforded more time for preparation and for the completion of a number of ships they have recently bought for transport purposes, which are now being transformed at Genoa. Likewise, I am equally impressed with the fact that they now find themselves in a position from which a withdrawal is impossible without suffering in effect a defeat. There is every indication of a carefully prepared, well-calculated, hard, cold, and cruel prosecution of preconceived plans by the use of an army and navy which is almost fanatic in idolatry of and devotion to one man and which is worked up to an emotional pitch unique in modern times. It is my wish that I could send some word in encouragement of the thought that some compromise might be arrived at in Geneva or elsewhere, but it is my firm belief that a compromise is possible only on Mussolini's own terms and that if these terms are not accepted he will proceed to his objectives despite world opinion and in opposition to whatever forces may be raised against him. Military capitulation is the only alternative. Your attention should be invited at the same time to the lasting effect necessitated by this situation on international situations in Europe and on changing political alignments. The settled friendship between Great Britain and Italy has gone and will not reappear for generations. In the press today is featured the friendly exchange of expressions between Chancelor Hitler and the new Ambassador of Italy to Germany, which presumably is a political warning to France that she must adhere to her alliance with Italy. But whatever arrangements Italy may be able to make with Germany in the future, and it would appear impossible that a reconciliation of their clashing interests could be effected, an entirely new element in the already complicated European situation has been brought about by the changed situation between Italy and England. The British Empire is directly threatened by Italy's action in the eastern Mediterranean and if the latter successfully establishes herself in Ethiopia, the Suez Canal will be almost as important politically to Italy as it is to England. If the Canal assumes its present importance to Italy with 200,000 soldiers south of it, when they achieve their ambition to have 10,000,000 colonists there, it will have a greater importance, and before long there will develop the necessity for an alternate route of communication between Italy and Ethiopia through Libya and across the Sudan which will be part of their efforts to solidify their position in Ethiopia if they accomplish their objective there. Thus the present situation is fraught with dangers from many angles for the future as well as for the present and it is my fear that its reverberations in the international relations of the world will last at least during the life of the present generation unless a decisive military defeat is suffered. LONG 52 Press Releases, vol. XIII, p. 194 Statement by the Secretary of State, September 12, 1935 In view of the deep concern of this Government and the widespread anxiety of the American people over recent developments which appear to constitute a grave threat to the peace of the world, I consider it desirable to recapitulate the steps thus far taken by this Government in contributing in every practicable way toward a peaceful settlement of the present dispute between Italy and Ethiopia. On the evening of July 3 the Emperor of Ethiopia summoned the American Chargé d'Affaires ad interim at Addis Ababa to the palace and handed the Chargé a communication in which the Emperor stated that he felt it to be his duty to ask the American Government to examine means of securing observance of the Pact of Paris. The Chargé was instructed to reply to the Emperor as follows: "I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of Your Imperial Majesty's note of July 3, 1935, and to inform Your Imperial Majesty that I immediately communicated its contents to my Government. I have been instructed by my Government to reply to your note as follows: "My Government, interested as it is in the maintenance of peace in all parts of the world, is gratified that the League of Nations, with a view to a peaceful settlement, has given its attention to the controversy which has unhappily arisen between your Government and the Italian Government and that the controversy is now in process of arbitration. My Government hopes that, whatever the facts or merits of the controversy may be, the arbitral agency dealing with this controversy may be able to arrive at a decision satisfactory to both of the Governments immediately concerned. "Furthermore, and of great importance, in view of the provisions of the Pact of Paris, to which both Italy and Abyssinia are parties, in common with 61 other countries, my Government would be loath to believe that either of them would resort to other than pacific means as a method of dealing with this controversy or would permit any situation to arise which would be inconsistent with the commitments of the Pact.'" On July 10, during a call of the Italian Ambassador made at the request of the Secretary of State, the Secretary made to the Ambassador a statement as follows: "Although we are not familiar with the facts or the merits of the questions at issue between Italy and Ethiopia, we are deeply interested in the preservation of peace in all parts of the world and we are particularly interested in those international arrangements designed to effect the solution of controversies by peaceable means. "Being convinced that world progress and economic recovery are urgently in need of peaceful conditions, particularly at this time, we feel impelled to impress upon the Italian Ambassador our increasing concern over the situation arising out of Italy's dispute with Ethiopia and our earnest hope that a means may be found to arrive at a peaceful and mutually satisfactory solution of the problem." On July 11, the Secretary of State conferred with the British and French Ambassadors. He called attention to articles which had appeared in the press wherein there was placed upon the American Government's reply to the Emperor of Ethiopia an interpretation implying that the American Government had abandoned the KelloggBriand Pact and the pact therefore was "dead". The Secretary said he felt this interpretation was entirely contrary to the sense of his note to the Emperor, which had emphasized the principles of the Pact of Paris and had given evidence of this Government's interest in the settlement of this dispute by peaceable means. On the same day, at his press conference, the Secretary of State pointed out that naturally the American Government, as had frequently been stated previously, is deeply concerned about the preservation of peace in every part of the world and is closely observing conditions and developments. On July 12, in response to various inquiries of newspaper correspondents, the Secretary of State made a statement as follows: "The Pact of Paris is no less binding now than when it was entered into by the 63 nations that are parties to it. By form and designation it constitutes a treaty by and among those nations. It is a declaration by the governments of the world that they condemn recourse to war for the solution of international controversies, and renounce it as an instrument of national policy in their relations with one another. Furthermore, it is an agreement and a solemn obligation that the settlement or solution of all disputes or conflicts among nations, of whatever nature or of whatever origin, shall never be sought except by pacific means. "The United States and the other nations are interested in the maintenance of the pact and the sanctity of the international commitments assumed thereby for the promotion and maintenance of peace among the nations of the world." On August 1, the President issued a statement as follows: "At this moment, when the Council of the League of Nations is assembled to consider ways for composing by pacific means the differences that have arisen between Italy and Ethiopia, I wish to voice the hope of the people and the Government of the United States that an amicable solution will be found and that peace will be maintained." Thereafter, during the month of August, expression of this hope of the people and Government of the United States was communi |