the precise nature and timing of further United States proposals to the United Nations on the question of disarmament." The committee recognizes that there may be considerations peculiarly within the knowledge of the President which may be relevant in determing the timing and nature of submitting such proposals. It views this resolulution as being in the nature of a suggestion that the President con sider taking action along the lines proposed.

In recommending approval of the pending resolution, the committee calls attention to the action of the Senate on July 25, agreeing to Senate Resolution 93, as amended, which provides for a study of disarmament proposals by a special subcommittee of the Foreign Relations Committee. The committee urges that this special subcommittee, as well as the executive branch of the Government, give the proposal embodied in this resolution the most careful study.

In reporting this resolution, the committee emphasizes that the problem of disarmament has many complicated facets that may affect the security of the United States. It believes that this proposal is one of many which deserve study to the end that the burden of armaments may be reduced without lessening the security of this Nation.

212. SENATE RESOLUTION FAVORING A REDUCTION IN ARMAMENTS WITH A VIEW TO IMPROVING WORLD LIVING STANDARDS, JULY 28, 19551

Whereas low living standards are one of the primary causes for war and improved living standards promote peace; and

Whereas such improved living standards can be attained only if world resources, both human and material, are devoted in increasing amounts to peaceful purposes; and

Whereas a major power has recently announced an increase in its armaments budget and has proclaimed as policy the expansion of arms production and war-supporting industry at the sacrifice of civilian production: Therefore be it

Resolved, That the President of the United States be requested to present to the United Nations this proposal to explore the possibilities of limiting the proportion of every nation's resources devoted to military purposes, both direct and indirect, so as to increase steadily the proportion devoted to improving the living levels of the people; and be it further

Resolved, That any such limitation provide adequate means of inspection and control and be made part of any comprehensive regulation, limitation, and balanced reduction of all armed forces and armaments; and be it further

Resolved, That the exploration of the possibilities of this method of disarmament be pursued to gain recognition for the principle that the way any government divides its resources can be taken as a measure of its peaceful or aggressive intent; also for the principle that high living standards constitute an automatic built-in deterrent against aggression and that any nation which deliberately and persistently holds down the living levels of its people to build military power is a threat to world security; also for the principle that the conversion time that must elapse before resources can be shifted

1 S. Res. 71, 84th Congress, 1st session.

from peaceful to war purposes can be used as a basis for preventing possible aggression before it takes place; and be it further

Resolved, That to implement these principles consideration be given to the following:

An adequate number of key resources be selected and standards be drawn up for determining what ratio of each of these resources should be set as a maximum ceiling limiting the proportion of each of these resources, which may be utilized for military purposes.

Along with each such ceiling adequate measures of inspection and control be enforced to prevent the diversion or conversion for military purposes of resources committed for peaceful uses, also that any such acts of diversion or conversion be considered automatic evidence of aggressive intent.

The ceilings limiting the possible military uses should be set to attain a major increase in living levels, to provide adequate warning before any of these resources can be converted to war production and to contribute to other arms and armament controls.

These ceilings be subject to periodic revision by agreement among the participating nations with the view of providing balanced security and progressively to increase the proportion of all resources to be committed to peaceful uses, provided that it be recognized a "freeze" of existing resources allocations cannot be taken as a starting stage because it would freeze a pattern of continuing aggression for some nations, while keeping others relatively defenseless.

Ceilings upon the military uses of these key resources be established to the end that no nation's economic expansion be curbed.

In setting such ceilings, allowance be made for the special economic needs of individual nations, particularly those with underdeveloped economies; and be it further

Resolved, That the President be further requested to direct the appropriate Government agencies to complete studies now underway, or to undertake any new studies that might be needed to carry through the objectives of this resolution.

(3) Control of Arms, Ammunition and Strategic Materials

213. REPORT OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS ON SUPERVISION OF INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN ARMS, APRIL 8, 1935 1 The Committee on Foreign Relations of the United States Senate, having had under consideration Executive H, Sixty-ninth Congress, first session, a convention for the supervision of international trade in arms and ammunition and in implements of war, signed at Geneva, Switzerland, on June 17, 1925, make this report and recommend that the Senate do advise and consent to the ratification of said treaty, and that the following resolution be adopted as in such cases made and provided:

Resolved (two-thirds of the Senators present concurring therein), That the Senate advise and consent to the ratification of Executive H, Sixty-ninth Congress, first session, a convention for the supervision of the international trade in arms and ammunition and in implements of war, signed at Geneva, Switzerland, on June 17, 1925, subject to the reservation that the said convention shall not come into force so far as the United States is concerned until it shall have come into force in U. 8. Congress. Senate. Executive Report No. 3, 74th Congress, 1st session.

798

respect to Belgium, the British Empire, Czechoslovakia, France, Germany,
Italy, Japan, Sweden, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

EFFECT AND PURPOSES OF CONVENTION

to

This convention is a far step in advance in the orderly control of arms, ammunition, and implements of war; in the prevention of the illegal distribution and use of arms, ammunition, and implements of Sov war; and in the repression of the possession of such arms, ammunition, and implements of war by bandits and other irresponsible persons LE and bodies of men.

The convention accomplishes this purpose chiefly through three means, namely:

1. It provides that the export of arms, ammunition, and imple ments of war shall not be permitted by any of the parties to the convention without the permission of the Government having control of the country or territory to which such arms, ammunition, or implements of war are to be exported, and provides a system of licensing th which will permit the lawful export to individuals, corporations, ord partnerships;

2. It prohibits the exportation of arms, ammunition, and implements of war into certain areas where there is a lack of governmental control and where there is a tendency to banditry and the illegal use of arms;

3. It requires frequent periodical advertisement of all exports of arms, ammunition, and implements of war, giving the names and addresses of the exporters and exportees, and the quantity and description of such war material.

The convention contains a detailed description of the different categories of weapons that are generally used exclusively in war and those that are beneficially used both in war and in peace. The degree of restriction depends upon the category in which such weapons fall. This convention was signed at Geneva, Switzerland, on June 17, 1925, by the following-named countries:

SIGNATORIES TO THE CONVENTION 2

Germany (Allemagne)

United States of America

Austria

Brazil

British Empire

India

Hungary

Italy

Japan

Latvia

Luxemburg

Poland

Roumania

Salvador

Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats and
Slovenes

Czechoslovakia (Tchécoslovaquie)

SENT TO SENATE IN 1926

The convention was transmitted by President Calvin Coolidge to the Senate on January 12, 1926, and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations. No action was taken on this convention until

The order of signature and of the above list is alphabetical according to the French spelling of each State

June 15, 1934, when the Committee made a favorable report to the Senate recommending that the Senate advise and consent to its ratification, subject to the reservation "that the said convention shall not come into force so far as the United States is concerned until it shall have come into force in respect to Belgium, the British Empire, Czechoslovakia, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Sweden, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics."

RATIFIED WITH PERSIAN GULF RESERVATION JUNE 15, 1934

The Senate, in giving its advice and consent on June 15, 1934, to the ratification of the convention, adopted the following additional reservation:

Resolved, That such adherence to this treaty shall not be construed as denying any right of sovereignty which the Kingdom of Persia may have in and to the Persian Gulf, or to the waters thereof.

Upon the suggestion of the Secretary of State a resolution was introduced in and adopted by the Senate on February 15, 1935, requesting the President to return the convention to the Senate for further consideration. In accordance with this resolution the President returned the convention and hearings thereon have been held by the Committee on Foreign Relations. As a result of those hearings the committee, with one dissenting voice, voted not to include the reservation regarding the Persian Gulf in the resolution of ratification of the convention and unanimously voted to report the convention favorably to the Senate. The action of the committee was taken on the basis of the following facts.

PRESIDENT RETURNS CONVENTION TO SENATE; COMMITTEE OMITS PERSIAN GULF RESERVATION

Upon the adoption of the Senate resolution giving its advice and consent to the ratification of the convention with a reservation regarding the Persian Gulf, the Department of State advised the French Government, the depositary of the convention, of the reservation in question. The French Government stated that it would be necessary to circulate the reservation among the 37 signatory powers for their acceptance. It was obvious that this procedure would require a considerable length of time, possibly several years. It was definitely ascertained that at least one major power would decline to accept the reservation, and it was feared that other powers would propose additional reservations. For these reasons it was clear that the American reservation would greatly delay, if not entirely prevent, the entrance of the convention into force.

It was considered highly desirable that the Arms Traffic Convention be ratified (a) because of the psychological effect which such ratification would have upon the negotiation of the new arms traffic convention now under discussion in Geneva, (b) to serve to provide for some measure of international control of the arms traffic in case the negotiations which are now under way are unsuccessful, and (c) because it was felt that the ratification of this convention was a moral obligation in view of the fact that it was drafted to replace the Convention of St. Germain-en-Laye and Paris of 1919, which this Government had failed to ratify, and was drawn up with a view to meeting the desires of this Government.

ADDITIONAL REASONS FOR RATIFICATION

In addition to the reasons above mentioned, the following factors were taken into consideration as affording a basis for this action: (a) The Persian Gulf, defined as "an arm of the Arabian Sea between the southwest coast of Persia (Iran) and the Arabian Peninsula", is bounded in addition to Iran by the independent kingdoms of Iraq and of Saudi Arabia and by the Arab principalities of Kuwait, Qatar, and Trucial Oman; the Arab principality of the Bahrein Islands is also located in the waters of the Persian Gulf. It is apparent therefore that the Persian Gulf washes the territories of several different countries and that it is an international waterway, forming a portion of the high seas. It is clear that Iran, as a maritime country bordering the Gulf, has equal rights with any other maritime country bordering on the same body of water. It is equally clear that Iran could not have sovereignty over all the waters of the Gulf but only over those which are within the internationally recognized territorial limits of the country.

(b) Ever since 1820 special treaty relationships have existed between Great Britain and the Shaikhs of Bahrein, as well as with various other Arab Shaikhdoms bordering on the Persian Gulf. Under the terms of a convention between Great Britain and the Shaikh of Bahrein, Great Britain is obligated to come to his support against any assaults and to take steps to obtain reparation for any injury inflicted on him or his territory. The Iranian Government is in dispute with Great Britain over the question of the sovereignty of the Islands of Bahrein, and the reservation regarding the Persian Gulf might be construed as referring indirectly to that matter.

(c) In addition to the Iranian claim to the Islands of Bahrein, it may be noted that on July 15, 1934, a bill was passed by the Iranian Parliament purporting to provide for the extension of Iranian sovereignty over the coastal waters of Iran up to a distance of 6 nautical miles from shore, including the shore of any island claimed to belong to Iran. The bill also purported to extend Iranian coastal waters, for patrolling purposes, to a distance of 12 nautical miles from shore, including the shore of any islands claimed by Iran.

Since the reservation, as worded, conferred no rights on Iran which it did not already enjoy, it is equally true that the removal of the reservation takes no rights away. Therefore, in order to hasten the entrance of the convention into force and to eliminate the possibility of this Government becoming involved in disputes in which it is not concerned, the committee voted to remove the reservation in question. After the convention was transmitted to the Senate by President Coolidge on January 12, 1926, the Department of State, on several occasions, urged that it be given favorable consideration. President Hoover, on January 10, 1933, recommended that the Senate give its advice and consent to the ratification of the convention, and President Roosevelt is entirely in accord with the views of former Presidents Coolidge and Hoover and regard to the advisability of its ratification by this Government.

RECOMMENDED BY PRESIDENTS COOLIDGE, HOOVER, AND ROOSEVELT, AND SECRETARY HULL

These facts, together with the recent history of the convention, and the reasons of the State Department for early ratification, are set