LEAG-XIE OF NATIONS,
cmmunicsted to
: Council »
0*362»1931«Vile
j
Geneva, May 19th, 1931
p o l i s h -l i t h i l 'itian _r e l a t i o n s
LGTTSRS
f r o :.:
THG LITHLA jTI/j : AND POLI 31 GCT^RITIISNTS
Report of the Lithuanian and Polish Plenipotentiaries,,
on the present position of t.he direct negotiations,
Note b?,r the Se ore tary-C-eneral.
The Secretary-General has the honour to communicate
to the Council a letter dated May 19th, 1931, together with
a report addressed to him by the Lithuanian and Polish
plenipotentiaries entrusted by their respective Governments
with the direct negotiations begun in accordance vzi t! the
request put forward by the Council of the League cf Nations
on September 18th, 1930»
-
2-
GGNEVA,
Kay 19th, 1931.
To the Secretary-General
of the League of Nations,
GENEVA.
Sir,
/ith reference to the report of the Spanish
representative submitted to the Council cf the League
of Nations on January 24th, 1931, the undersigned
Lithuanian and Polish plenipotentiaries entrusted by their
respective Governments with, the negotiations suggested
by the Council on September 18th, 1330} have the honour to
transmit herewith a report on the result of the negotiations
referred to, which they request you to be good enough to
communicate to the Council.
r7e have the honour to b e e t c .
(Signed) P c KLIMAS.
Annex :
report
(Signed) SZUMLAKO^SKI.
The Council of the League of Nations on January 24th,
1931, approved the conclusions of the following Report
submitted by the Spanish Representative :
,?At its last session, in September 1930, the Council
asked the Polish and Lithuanian Governments to enter fortiurith
into direct negotiations with the object of restoring order and
tranquillity along the Polish-Lithuanian administrative line.
I am glad to say that these negotiations were held at
Berlin and Geneva from December 15th, 1930, to January 20th,
1931.
As will be seen from the report and annexes (C t97,1931.VII),
which the two parties just communicated to us in accordance with
the Council's request of September 18th, 1930 (C.536.1930.V I I ),
these negotiations related to three draft agreements, viz:
Two draft agreements on the settlement of
incidents or conflicts arising out of the supervision
or the crossing of the Polish-Lithuanian adminj^yfcrative
line (Polish draft and Lithuanian counter-draft),
and a draft arrangement relative to the joint utilisa­
tion of the fluvial sector of the Polish-Lithuanian
administrative line > -drawn up by the Polish delegation.
I regret to say that the two parties did not arrive
at an agreement with regard to the first two drafts, which
relate specially to the settlement of incidents, this being
the essential object of the negotiations.
As for the draft arran^eiLtiu.S relative lo the joint
utilisation of the fluvial sectors of the Polish-Lithuanian
administrative line, the discussion was postponed until the
end of the Council's present session, it being understood that
"the delegates of Lithuania and Poland would dscide at Geneva
what action should be taken regarding the drafte”
The report of the Polish and Lithuanian plenipotentiaries,
v/ith tlaroe annexes, has just been communicated to us.
In view
of the T/ork which remains to b3 done before the und of the
present session,
Lie Council
ttj
.11
perhaps agree with me that the
consideration of this question should be postponed until our
May session,
I hope that, before that date, an arrangèrent rill be
signed relative to the utilisation cf the fluvial sector cf the
Poll si,-Lithuanian administrative lino, which may successfully
supplement the Agreement cf Kcnigsborg and may make it possible
for the Polish and Lithuanian Governments to inform us at our
next session that they have also reached an agreement designed
to obviate and liquidate incidents and conflicts in these
districts,,T
The Lithuanian and Polish plenipotentiaries met at
Geneva on May 16th, 1931 to continue the negotiations begun at
Berlin and Geneva.
After an exchange of views on the questions
referred to in the Spanish representatives report, the plenipo­
tentiaries of the two
1,
Parties arrived at the following con-
The Lithuanian Government considers the appointment
of a committee of representatives of neutral Powers, with a
view to the settlement of incidents or conflicts arising out of
the supervision or the crossing of the Polish-Lithuanian
administrative line, as the surest guarantee cf order and
tranquillity in the region of the administrative line.
The committee, which the Lithuanian Government proposes,
would have the advantage of remedying the absence of normal
relations between the two countries, with a view to the settle­
ment of incidents cr conflicts - this settlement being the
essential object of the negotiation;.,,
At the same time, the Lithuanina Government dees not see
its way, under present circumstances* to contemplate the
possibility of an agreement for the joint utilisation of the
fluvial sectors, inasmuch as an agreement of this kind goes
beyond the Konigsberg Agreement with regard to the granting of
facilities to inhabitants whose property is crossed by the
administrative line.
In the Lithuanian Government's opinion*
the Polish proposal for the utilisation of the rivers for
local traffic and for any other traffic, cannot be reconciled
with the Litnuanlan Government’s ov.n attitude in regard to the
general situation, differing as that does from the attitude of
the Polish Government,
The Polish proposal is, moreover, of
a nature tc increase the field of friction in the absence of a
neutral committee capable of ensuring the settlement of incidents,
2a
The Lithuanian plenipotentiary having insisted
on the Lithuanian proposal to set up an international committee,
the Polish plenipotentiary stated that his Government had already
had occasion more than on.ee to explain the reasons why it was
not in a position to acceded to the Lithuanian Government’s
suggestion.
The Polish Government sees no reason to modify
-
6-
the procedure laid down in the 7th paragraph of the resolution
of the Council of the League of Nations dated December 10th,
1927 .
The Polish representative further indicated that, in
his opinion, the Lithuanian Government *s proposal did not meet
the practical requirements of the real situation but was
actuated by political motives.
Consequent I;7, the Polish Govern­
ment is not prepared to re-open the discussion on this point.
In proposing to the Lithuanian Government to conclude
the agreements referred to, the Polish Government has been
inspired solely by the desire to leave no effort untried in
order to prevent the incidents in question or to secure their
settlement as promptly as possible,,
It appeared to the Polish Government to be desirable, in
connection with the current negotiations, to raise the question
of a traffic settlement on the frontier fluvial sectors, in view
of the fact that the absence of any settlement has in the past
given rise to certain incidents which the Polish Government
would have wished to prevent.
The Polish Government does not
see how such a traffic settlement would affect the Agreement
signed at Konigsberg to enable the inhabitants of the frontier
regions to cultivate their own land.
It believes, on the
contrary, that the arrangement proposed might, in the words of
the Spanish representative in the report to which reference has
been made, ”successfully supplement the Agreement of Konigsberg."
The Polish Government regrets that the Lithuanian
Government has not seen its way to conclude the agreements in
question.
It does not, however, pronose tc take any other
steps to press its proposals, as the situation has never seemed
to it, end Joss not now seem, to justify any serious apprehen­
sion*
-
3»
7-
In view of the above considerations, the
plenipotentiaries of the two Parties found that it was
impossible to reach an agreement between them.
GEl'ISVAj
May 19th, 1931#
(S)
P. KLIMAS.
(S)
SZUMLAKOWSKIo