840.70/11–544: Telegram
The Acting Secretary of State to the Chargé in the United Kingdom (Gallman)
9344. For EITO Delegation. Department notes from last paragraph of Embassy’s 9603, November 5, 5 p.m.72 there is a possibility Soviet Delegation may leave this week. It is our belief that Soviet withdrawal from the conference or departure of their Delegation should be forestalled if possible until our position on the Soviet note can be fully determined.
With this in mind following comments may be made on the proposals contained in your 9584, November 4. It appears that the British are prepared to go along on an EITO organization without the Soviets if necessary. The main U.S. and U.K. interest so far as the military occupation is concerned will be in western Europe. Therefore prime U.S. interest in EITO is to see that our military are adequately serviced. However we would naturally prefer the participation of the Soviets and the eastern European powers.
- 1)
- We are not sure that either your formula or the British formula would avoid the Polish issue. It is entirely possible that the Russians may take the position that a part of Poland is liberated and that the Committee of Liberation should be recognized as having jurisdiction over that area at this time.
- 2)
- Confining the approach to fully liberated countries would probably leave out at the present time such countries as Holland and Czechoslovakia; thus deserting the Czechs after the strong stand they have taken.
- 3)
- Even if the Soviets would accept a re-draft submitted by the U.S. and U.K., it would perforce be presented to the other Continentals on a “take it or leave it” basis, which we do not regard with favor. If the Soviet reply is negative or long delayed valuable time would be lost.
- 4)
- Since other Continentals have already been brought into the picture and have supported the U.K. and U.S. position, they might well be antagonized if they were presented with an agreed final draft on which they had not been consulted. We feel UK–US position would be strengthened by full consultation with Continentals.
- 5)
- What prevents Interim Commission from functioning on bipartite basis in consultation with Continentals and military and from including the Soviets whenever they wish to participate? We had assumed Commission was functioning on this basis and that Clay and Williams’ telegrams73 were in connection with their work on the Commission. Please clarify status of Commission.
With the foregoing as background and in order to forestall, if possible, precipitous Soviet action, Department suggests for your consideration and, if you concur, for British consideration the following procedure:—
That the Chairman of the Conference or the Chairman of the Main Committee circularize all Delegations with a letter along the following lines:
There is apparent agreement among all Delegations of the desirability of establishing a European inland transport organization. Many constructive amendments to the draft agreement have been submitted. It is believed that most useful progress can be made to reach a satisfactory agreement by a series of informal discussions among the various Delegations. Accordingly the Chairman proposes that the U.K. and U.S. Delegations, as original drafters, hold informal talks with the other Delegations to consider the various amendments which have been submitted with a view toward reaching an acceptable agreement.
Department recognizes that even with this informal approach Soviets may raise Polish question, however they might be answered orally that this was merely an attempt to arrive at satisfactory solution of technical problems for which Conference had been called. This approach would technically keep the Conference in session; maintain flexibility; and give the U.S. and U.K. Governments adequate time to consider their reply to the Soviet note.