390D.11/195

Memorandum of Conversation, by Mr. George V. Allen of the Division of Near Eastern Affairs

Participants: Turkish Ambassador60
Mr. Murray61
Mr. Allen

During a call at the Division today, the Turkish Ambassador was informed of the receipt of a telegram from the American Embassy at Ankara (No. 41, April 17, 5 p.m.) reporting that the Turkish authorities were insisting that a provision be included in the nationality agreement stating specifically that the persons concerned would lose definitely the right to reenter Turkey.

Mr. Murray recalled that when the Turkish Government first made known to us, last year, its desire that a provision of this kind be included, we had suggested the insertion of an article similar to Article 1 of the Treaty of Establishment and Sojourn between the United States and Turkey,62 providing that nothing in the agreement should be construed as affecting existing statutes or regulations of either country in relation to the immigration of aliens or the right of either country to enact such statutes. Mr. Murray suggested to the Ambassador the reasons for our being unable to accept the more categorical and definite wording desired by the Turkish Government. He pointed out that language similar to that we suggested was contained in several of our treaties, the ratification of which has been approved by the Senate. He thought it would be easy for us to conclude an agreement containing this wording, and probably difficult to obtain acceptance of any other. He pointed out that, furthermore, the Turkish wording, if adopted, would involve an agreement on the part of the American Government to a discrimination by Turkey against a group of naturalized American citizens as compared with native-born citizens as regards entry into Turkey. Mr. Murray said that it had long been a principle of American law, based on an Act of Congress enacted in 1868,63 that no discrimination should be made by the American Government or its officials between native-born and naturalized citizens.

Mr. Murray expressed the opinion, moreover, that the Turkish Government’s categorical language might not be in the best interests of Turkey itself, since a definite provision that all of the persons [Page 1006] affected would lose the right to reenter Turkey might unduly restrain the Turkish Government’s freedom of action. Turkey might find it desirable, in some cases, to permit the individuals to reenter Turkey, and might find its own provision of some embarrassment.

Mr. Murray said that the purposes which the Turkish authorities have in mind would be entirely accomplished by our proposed language, which gives either party entire freedom of action with regard to the entry of aliens into its territory. He thought our wording would be more satisfactory for both Governments.

The Turkish Ambassador indicated that he himself was satisfied that our wording would accomplish the desired purpose of both parties, but that in an effort to discern the objections which might be in the minds of the Turkish negotiators, he presumed they were not entirely satisfied that our language would accomplish their purpose. He thought that our draft would have been more easily understood if worded more simply, or somewhat as follows:

Each nation reserves entire freedom of action with regard to the entry of aliens into its territory.

The Ambassador was informed that his wording expressed concisely and precisely our understanding of the meaning of the language of the American proposal. The Ambassador then said that he would write to his Government, attempting to persuade it to accept the language proposed by us, pointing out the reasons which caused us to prefer our wording and which prevented us from accepting the Turkish proposal. He said he would suggest that an interpretation of our language, as indicated above, be stated in a procès-verbal or subsidiary exchange of notes, if the Turkish authorities retained any doubts on the subject.

The Ambassador requested that a copy of the pertinent provisions of the Act of Congress of 1868, referred to by Mr. Murray, be furnished him.64 He indicated that our reference to this law enabled him, for the first time, to understand clearly why we were unable to accept the language suggested by the Turkish Government.

  1. Mehmet Münir Ertegün.
  2. Wallace Murray, Chief of the Division of Near Eastern Affairs.
  3. Signed at Ankara, October 28, 1931, Foreign Relations, 1931, vol. ii, p. 1042.
  4. An Act Concerning the Rights of American Citizens in Foreign States, Rev. Stat. 35.
  5. On April 20, Mr. Murray sent to the Ambassador the pertinent provision of the Act of July 27, 1868, reading as follows:

    “Section 2000. All naturalized citizens of the United States, while in foreign countries, are entitled to and shall receive from this Government the same protection of persons and property which is accorded to native-born citizens.”