CFM Files
United States Delegation Journal
USDel (PC) (Journal) 35
The Polish representative in presenting his Government’s claim of ten million dollars for reparation from Italy, said that Poland in assessing its claim had held in mind the difficult economic situation in Italy and the heavy burden of reparation Italy would have to pay to those countries suffering great damage as the result of Italian invasion and occupation. He asked for settlement of the claim through cancellation of the loan of 1924 from Italy to Poland and the remainder of the balance owed to Italy as a result of a pre-war agreement for construction by Italy of two transatlantic liners, one of which was sunk by an Italian submarine. He stated that it would be most unjust if Poland, whose economic situation is far worse than Italy’s, had to service pre-war debts to Italy, particularly since this could only be done through commodity exports to Italy.
[Page 383]The representative of Yugoslavia described the Yugoslav claim for 1 billion 300 million dollars as representing only a portion of the damage resulting from Italian invasion and occupation. Furthermore, it amounted to a mere fraction of Italian pre-war budget expenditures for the Army and Navy. On the basis of Italian pre-war expenditures for military purposes and “official” Italian estimates of present industrial capacity, he asserted that any arguments to the effect that Italy could not bear a heavy reparation burden were specious. Pointing out that Italy had suffered comparatively little damage in the industrial north, he said that, if liberated from the burden of the occupation forces, Italy could not only pay reparation but increase its standard of living.
The Belgian representative said that Belgium had not submitted a claim against Italy and would only put forward a claim in the same measure that other countries in the same position as Belgium (countries not having suffered invasion and occupation) were granted reparation.