840.70/10–1844: Telegram
The Ambassador in the Soviet Union (Harriman) to the Secretary of State
[Received 5:15 p.m.]
3975. I have today addressed a letter to Molotov setting forth the Department’s position with respect to the EITO draft agreement as stated in the Department’s telegram 2452 of October 17, 7 p.m. The British Ambassador is addressing a similar communication to Molotov going into somewhat greater detail.
I hope that these representations will lead to a liberalization of the instructions of the Soviet delegates at the Conference. In the event that this should not be the case, I should like to make the [Page 829] following general observations although I have not sufficient information to judge whether they would be applicable in this instance.
As a general practice in matters of this kind, I feel we should not unduly weaken arrangements for technical collaboration simply to be able to say that we have secured Soviet participation. Having put the matter clearly before the Soviets and having given full weight to their desires and point of view, we should not hesitate to say that unless they can assure their effective collaboration, there will be no agreement. Only in this way can we bring home to them the full measure of their responsibility for the position they are taking. I am not sure that in many instances they would not prefer in the end to compromise with their exaggerated ideas of security and independence of action rather than to have it said that no agreement could be reached because of their attitude.
With respect to the matter at hand, the Soviet Government is probably motivated by political rather than technical or humanitarian considerations, and has in mind the achievement of its own complete independence of operation in territories under its control rather than the interests of orderly reestablishment of European transport in general. Unless these conceptions can be corrected and unless the Soviet leaders can be brought to see the necessity of some sacrifice on their own part in the interests of general rehabilitation in Europe, there is little point in getting them into an international transport organization at all.
Repeated to London as 223.