701.6111/984

Memorandum by Mr. Edward Page, Jr., of the Division of European Affairs

The Hostile Attitude of the Soviet Ambassador to the State Department

Last evening I dined at the Lithuanian Legation. Among those present were the Soviet Ambassador, the Latvian, Lithuanian, and Bulgarian Ministers, the Counselor and First Secretary of the Soviet Embassy, and Mr. Todd, Tass8 representative in Washington.

During after-dinner coffee, Mr. Oumansky adopted a smug, complacent and domineering attitude over his colleagues (Ministers whose countries exist under the shadow of the Soviet Union),9 The Ambassador also went out of his way to be hostile toward the State Department. He started the after-dinner conversation by suggesting that we all enter into a short discussion, and then adjoined with words somewhat as follows: “But perhaps this would not be fair, for I am sure we would all be grouped together against Mr. Page”. He then went on to explain in a sarcastic tone that the American Government had instructed American flagships to refuse to carry mails to the Soviet Union and to the Baltic States, and added that this was not surprising. I asked the Ambassador where he had received this information, and was told that he had read it in the press. I stated that I felt sure that the press report was false, since I had been informed only that morning that mails, with the exception of parcel post, to the Soviet Union and the Baltic were being despatched via Italy and Germany. I observed that the parcel post question was under consideration, and that I doubted whether the temporary absence of this service would create much hardship, since I did not believe that, with the exception of small shipments through Intourist, the volume of parcel post amounted to much.* The Ambassador stated that he was glad to receive this news, and changed the subject.

[Page 294]

Mr. Oumansky then pointed out to all those present that because of the unfriendly attitude of the State Department, Intourist, as well as Bookniga and Amkino, had been forced to close down. I interposed that there was no reason why such firms should not carry on their legitimate business provided they registered with the State Department as agents of foreign principals. Mr. Oumansky remarked that it was unlikely that Intourist, Bookniga, et cetera, would open up again, in view of the attitude of the State Department. He commented at length on how Soviet citizens had been insulted and humiliated in this country by being photographed, handcuffed to police authorities, and by being commented upon in the American press in an insulting manner.

The Latvian, Lithuanian and Bulgarian Ministers maintained a discreet silence during this tirade. I was of the opinion that they considered the Ambassador to be acting in extremely bad taste in criticizing in fairly strong terms the Government to which he was accredited. I did not wish to enter into a heated discussion with Mr. Oumansky, and merely observed that the firms in question had not complied with our regulations regarding registration, and had been prosecuted according to law.

Later, in commenting on the difficulties which the Soviet Embassy was encountering in receiving radio broadcasts from Moscow, Mr. Oumansky, in a joking, yet extremely sarcastic manner, observed that it would not surprise him to learn that the State Department had deliberately arranged interference in order to hinder the Embassy’s radio reception. This remark was typical of the critical and hostile manner in which Mr. Oumansky conducted himself throughout the entire joint conversation.

Mr. Oumansky later drew me aside and after commenting at length on the discriminatory attitude of the State Department in regard to the much-discussed question of the notification by the Embassy of the presence of Soviet officials in this country, stated that he had reluctantly approved of the procedure of notification agreed upon by Messrs. Gromyko, Chuvakhin, Henderson and Page early last week. He then brought up the usual complaints regarding the Maritime Commission, moral embargo, et cetera, and inferred that the State Department was principally to blame for the present strained situation in American-Soviet relations. I advanced some of the usual rejoinders, and stated that I saw no purpose in going into the matter again. Mr. Oumansky concluded by asking me to tell Mr. Henderson that he was still expecting a reply in regard to his representations over the refusal of the Maritime Commission to charter vessels to Amtorg. His favorite word throughout the evening appeared to be “discrimination”.

[Page 295]

I was strongly impressed during the entire evening by the outspoken animosity and hostility toward the American Government, and especially towards the State Department, on the part of Mr. Oumansky, and the First Secretary, Chuvakhin. Mr. Gromyko, Counselor of the Soviet Embassy, on the other hand, appeared to be quite friendly, and conducted himself much more befitting a diplomat in a country to which he is accredited.10

E[dward] P[age]
  1. Telegraph agency of the Soviet Union, official communications organization of the Soviet Government.
  2. For correspondence concerning the activities of the Soviet Union in the Baltic States, see Foreign Relations, The Soviet Union, 1933–1939, pp. 934 ff., and Foreign Relations, 1940, vol. i, pp. 357 ff.
  3. Mr. Lammiel, Director of the Foreign Mails Section of the Post Office, confirmed this morning what I had told Mr. Oumansky, that is, that mails were going to the Soviet Union and the Baltic via Italy and Germany, and that there had been no refusals to carry mails to these countries on the part of American ships. Mr. Lammiel also informed me that the Post Office was endeavoring at this time to make arrangements with the Rumanian postal authorities for despatching parcel post to the Soviet Union via Rumania. [Footnote in the original.]
  4. Andrey Andreyevich Gromyko had been in the United States only since the previous November; see the memorandum of November 17, 1939, by the Acting Secretary of State, Foreign Relations, The Soviet Union, 1933–1939, p. 794.