Coll 6/81 'Syria: Status of Alexandretta and Antioch.' [‎78r] (156/576)

THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF HIS BRITANNIC MAJESTY’S GOVERNMENT
: P. Z.
EASTERN (Syria).
1033
^■1937 J
January 29, 1937.
CONFIDENTIAL.
Section 2.
[E 668/3/89] Copy No.
Viscount Chilston to Mr. Eden.—(Received January 29.)
(No. 42.)
Sir, Moscow, January 26, 1937.
WITH reference to your despatch No. 29 enclosing a memorandum of the
11th January on the Alexandretta dispute, I have the honour to inform you that
the Soviet press has carefully avoided all expression of opinion regarding this
question, while reproducing accounts of the progress of the dispute, and foreign
comments on it, to an extent which seems to reveal great interest on the part of
the Soviet Government.
2. The report now received of the satisfactory settlement of the dispute at
Geneva would, no doubt, have given rise to long articles here, had not the trial
of M. Pyatakov and his associates reduced all other news to negligible proportions.
Nevertheless, a brief telephone message published to-day on the front page of
the Izvestiya appears to me to have a certain interest. The newspaper's special
correspondent emphasises, as was to be expected, the fact that this is the second
dispute which Turkey has seen fit to solve by peaceful methods, as opposed to
“ the Italo-German technique of the fait accompli." He goes on to say that it
is no secret at Geneva that both Germany and Italy pressed the Turkish Govern
ment in a “ friendly ” way to seize the sanjak by armed force; and that German
advisers in particular urged the advantages of such tactics, hoping to advance
thereby the date of a general conflict. The fact that Turkey declined to follow
this advice is welcomed by the correspondent as a good augury, “especially at a
moment when the exponents of the fait accompli and their closest associates are
endeavouring by every means in their power to reduce to nothing the rights of
the League High Commissioner at Danzig.”
3. The Izvestiya's correspondent concludes by drawing attention to “one
extremely important fact ” : From the outset of the conflict, he states, certain
organs of the foreign press, and particularly of the Italian press, persistently
put about rumours to the effect that Great Britain was against France in this
question, and was bent on achieving the complete separation of the sanjak from
the rest of Syria. “ Discussions at Geneva have shown these reports to be
completely untrue. In this question also, Anglo-French solidarity has been
maintained intact.”
4. In view of the fact that M. Litvinov is now at Geneva, I think we may
assume that this telephonic message represents the views of the Soviet Govern
ment. Despite the recent signs of a cooling-off in Turco-Soviet relations, the
U.S.S.R. would presumably have stood to gain, if only for the reason given in
paragraph 3 of your telegram No. 173 of the 14th December last to Angora, by
Turkey’s absorption of the sanjak. Probably, however, the Soviet Government
were well aware that this was not a practical possibility, and in the meantime
they have a paramount interest in the conservation of Anglo-French solidarity.
5. I am sending copies of this despatch to His Majesty's representatives
at Paris and Angora.
I have, &c.
CHILSTON.