Office of the Historian

711.00 Statement July 16, 1937/163: Telegram

The Ambassador in the Soviet Union (Davies) to the Secretary of State

Moscow, August 10, 1937—11 p.m.
[Received August 11—10:30 a.m.]

222. My 217, August 8, 11 a.m.,11 Moscow Pravda today carried an article entitled “Hull’s declaration.” The following represents a brief summary of this article:

1.
Germany and Italy by “their insolent intervention” in Spain “are unleashing a new great war in Europe and the whole world.”
2.
The Japanese aggressor by endeavoring to convert China into a colony is dealing “a severe blow to the interests of England, the United States and other nations and threatens radically to change the existing correlation of forces in the Pacific.”
3.
“In the United States of America people in the broadest strata of American society are coming to realize more and more clearly that war having once broken out in any part of the world can rapidly develop into a world conflagration.”
4.
“In this connection the statement to the press made by Mr. Secretary of State Hull on July 16 is of profound interest.” In it “Mr. Hull pointed to the peace loving position of the United States Government which defends the principles of abstention from the use of force in settling international problems and stands for scrupulous observance of treaties.”
5.
Mr. Hull invited comments from various governments regarding the principles enunciated in his statement. Litvinov in replying agreed with these principles “because they coincide with the general line followed by the Soviet Government in its foreign policy.”
6.
“The block of Fascist aggressive countries must be opposed by a camp of the nations that stand for peace.” As Litvinov stated, recently “the task of the moment consists in the strengthening, if one may so express himself, of the potential of peace. This potential consists not only in the defensive might of the peaceful states but to a considerable degree in such factors as the League of Nations Covenant, the Briand-Kellogg Pact, the regional pacts for mutual assistance, the ideas of collective security and inclinations of peace, the manifestations of solidarity of the peaceful countries and their ability to find a common language among themselves. The potential of peace in its totality plays a tremendous role in the retarding and staving off of aggression.”
7.
Although 37 nations have responded to Mr. Hull’s statement, replies have not yet been received from Germany, Italy, and Japan. “The silence of the aggressors is more eloquent and more convincing than any of the bombastic ‘pacifist’ declarations and interviews of Hitler, Mussolini and the Tokyo diplomats.”
8.
“Every new manifestation in favor of such unity and solidarity of the forces of peace against Fascist incendiaries of war sounds as a [Page 773] warning to the unrestrained enemies of culture, democracy and national independence. From this point of view Mr. Hull’s statement which has been supported by numerous countries acquires a positive political significance.”

Davies
  1. Not printed.↩