840.70/10–1644: Telegram
The Ambassador in the United Kingdom (Winant) to the Secretary of State
[Received 8:28 p.m.]
8791. Soviet Delegation advises that, after fullest consideration over the weekend, they have decided, in submitting proposed amendments to EITO draft agreement to the main committee of the Conference, to reserve their position in Article IV, first paragraph; Article VII, section 2 (a) through (c), section 3, and section 12; Article VIII, sections 2 (ii), 4 and 5; and Article XII. This means, they are still in doubt on a number of points on which, as indicated in Embassy’s 8753 of October 14, 8 p.m., we thought we had reached agreement. They state, however, that they will probably be able to agree with us on Articles IV and VII on whose wording we had previously agreed but that they are in doubt about sections 4 and 5 of Article VIII.
As the Soviets say that it will be two days before they can inform as further concerning their position, we assume that they await new instructions from Moscow. We consider it urgently necessary to ask [Page 826] the Embassy in Moscow to place before the Soviet Government the considerations which in our view are fundamental to the successful operation of the organization, in time to receive consideration ‘before Soviet Government has given new instructions to its EITO Delegation here if possible.
In discussions with the Soviets, we have accepted the principle that the organization should be mainly coordinating and advisory and we have agreed to so state in the opening paragraph of Article I but we believe that the agreement must contain certain specific commitments on the part of the members of the organization. Thus, while we agreed to rephrase Article VII dealing with the executive functions of the organization so that the latter would have power only to make recommendations, we have insisted that Article VIII, sections 2, 4 and 5, should be so worded that the member governments in signing the agreement promise to carry out the recommendations of the organization as to the export and import of rolling stock and the movement of priority traffic provided under Article VII. We have suggested substantially the following wording for sections 4 and 5 of Article VIII:
“Every member government undertakes that it will cooperate fully with the organization in the exercise of its functions under Article VII, sections 2 and 6, and in particular by carrying out the recommendations of the organization made under these sections.”
Without such a promise, we do not feel the organization can be effective. In support of our position we have pointed out to the Soviets that during the occupation, the three great powers will have long lines of communication across the territories of other member governments, and that it is essential that nothing should interfere with the movement of traffic which they require and the provision of transport equipment and material necessary to ensure that movement. We and the British have pointed out that we are willing that decisions on these points should be made by the organization and we think it only appropriate that member governments should agree to carry out the organization’s recommendations. The continental governments will also have an interest in the movement of certain types of priority traffic, such as repatriation and relief traffic. All member governments will be consulted in the making of the organization’s decisions affecting them.
The Soviet Delegation have said they agree that member governments ought to carry out recommendations of the organization, and that they undoubtedly will do so because of the sanctions which the great powers will always be able to impose on a member government. We and the British have stated that we would prefer to rely on the promise of a member government to abide by the organization’s recommendations [Page 827] than to rely on the fact that the three Governments can apply sanctions if necessary.
Of the governments whose transport systems are involved, the French have reserved their decision on these sections, while no other government has raised any objection to the commitments in our original draft.
The Soviets have raised another awkward point of principle in the form of a suggested additional paragraph to Article XII, reading as follows: “Since the activity of the organization does not touch the territories of the United Kingdom and the USSR, it is established that Article XII of the agreement, which provides for the primacy of the present agreement over all other transport agreements, does not affect the agreements of the USSR and the United Kingdom with other countries of Continental Europe.” We have consistently opposed this amendment, explaining the details of the obvious reasons for our opposition. The Soviet Delegation have consented to reconsider the paragraph and are meanwhile reserving their position.
While other points remain in doubt, we feel that it is basic to secure agreement on the question of principle in Article VIII and to prevent the suggested addition to Article XII. We feel that the Embassy in Moscow might be able to help in explaining our point of view and the reasons for it. If Department agrees, it is hoped Embassy Moscow will be instructed to approach Soviet Foreign Office along the lines of this message and the Embassy’s 8753 which have been repeated to Moscow. British are instructing Clark Kerr to concert with our Ambassador and support any action he may take.