Mitteilungen des Österreichischen Staatsarchivs 37. (1984)
ORDE, Anne: France and the Genoa Conference of 1922
France and the Genoa Conference of 1922 337 new concessions, and giving the Russians the right to tax their proceeds for the service of reconstruction loans. One of the Ministry of Finance representatives asked whether they were to pronounce for the restitution of expropriated property or to recognise the fact of nationalisation and demand compensation. Seydoux replied that the Cannes resolution said “restore or compensate all foreign interests“. A representative from the Ministry of Agriculture urged that for the recovery of Russian agriculture there must be an absolute return to private property: the peasant would have to be assured of full possession of his land for a period long enough to allow the making of improvements. There was general agreement that France would have to take part in the consortium but should produce a plan of her own. Charmed of the Ministry of Commerce set out a proposal for special development regions in Russia. Help to Russia could only be given on the conditions indicated at Cannes, and foreign business confidence would only be inspired by circumstances generally found in civilised countries, such as the right of property and freedom to work. But scattered foreigners enjoying special privileges in Russia would be in such a difficult position that there should instead be regions where the whole population should enjoy these rights; and the constitution of the RSFSR (Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic) allowed room for local autonomy. Lion asked, however, where the capital for such a scheme was to come from: his plan, completed by Pineau’s proposal for agriculture, was the only one that could work without fresh capital58). These ideas did not appear altogether fanciful when put alongside indications of the Soviet attitude provided by Krasin. His contact, Maréchal, said that ever since Krasin had arrived in London the Royal Dutch Shell group had been trying to get recognition of their former rights in Baku and the Caucasus and a promise of favourable treatment, but the negotiations had not succeeded because the Soviet government was determined to keep the monopoly of oil exploitation and wished to remove British interests from the route to Persia. It was, however, willing to give special advantages to a Franco-American group and there could be no question of the economic restoration of Russia without oil. The Russians were also offering agricultural concessions for foreign management. After talking to Maréchal Seydoux noted that it was more in French interest to support the Soviet ideas on oil rather than a British plan for a chartered company in which Royal Dutch Shell would have the lion’s share. In return France could ask for large compensation for French interests, or for entry into a Soviet-controlled group and an option on a part of the output that would assure France of a supply independent of the big British and American groups. On the other hand it would be contrary to the political position taken hitherto to rely on Soviet promises and act against Britain, and so they might propose a compromise, a consortium in which the big oil groups would have a 5B) Interministerial committee on Russia meetings, 24, 27, 28 February 1922: ibid 106, 107. Mitteilungen, Band 37 22
