740.00119 EW/1–945: Telegram
The Acting Secretary of State to the Ambassador in the Soviet Union (Harriman)
82. ReDeptel 30, January 5. The Department has desired to secure Soviet agreement to our position respecting the second period of the armistice either in Article XVIII or in the protocol containing the ACC statutes. We can accept the present wording of Article XVIII, without making the same reservation as was made in the case of the Bulgarian armistice only if the statutes of the ACC are satisfactory on that point. The employment of the word “concurrence”, as you proposed, would of course meet our position. The word “consultation” does not meet it. If Molotov remains firm on this point, we should prefer to have the paragraph on the second period eliminated entirely from the statutes. We would then be in a position to make a [Page 971] clear-cut reservation to Article XVIII along the lines stated in the Department’s 30, January 5, indicating that we consider the organization of the ACC in the second period to be an open question which we may take up at a later date. If Molotov does not consent to eliminate the paragraph from the statutes, you should make clear to him that our acceptance of the statutes and our interpretation of Article IV thereof must be considered in the light of our reservation to Article XVIII.
With respect to the first period the Department has always acknowledged the chief responsibility of the Soviet authorities in the conduct of the affairs of the Control Commission (reEmbs 88, January 9), and of course considers that the “consultation” which was proposed in your draft should not be operative in such a way as to prevent the Soviet High Command from taking action which it considers necessary for military reasons. If the term “consultation” seems to the Soviet Government to mean prolonged discussion and to imply an obligation to accept modifications, their objection to the term might be met by the following change in the language of the Soviet text as it appears in the second paragraph of your 75, January 8:
“… shall call meetings and inform the British and American representatives of policy directives (i.e. directives involving matters of general principle) prior to the issuance of such directives to the Hungarian authorities in the name of the Commission, and take note of such observations as the British or American representatives may desire to make.”
We should like you to urge the Soviet Government to agree to this alternative text, failing which you may yield on the point of formal provision for prior consultation in the first period, putting it on record that our chief purpose in seeking a formal agreement on this matter has been to prevent a situation from arising whereby, precisely in matters of policy, the American representative on an Allied Commission should be subjected to a position where he learns, only after their promulgation, of decisions taken in the name of the Allied Governments, and may then be compelled publicly to disassociate his Government from such decisions.
We would not hold up the armistice by insistence on the formal provision that our representative should determine the size and composition of his staff, although this seemed to us a thoroughly reasonable provision, and it too was designed to remove occasion for complaints on individual cases as they may arise. We are also willing not to press for detailed stipulations regarding landing rights, entry and exit of staff personnel and travel within Hungary, provided we are given assurances that the Soviet authorities on the spot will be instructed to make prompt and satisfactory arrangements for the needs of our mission.
[Page 972]The British may propose that the statutes provide for the access to the ACC on the part of Czechoslovak and Yugoslav representatives. The Department is willing that such a clause be included.
Has anything been heard from Molotov on the question of making available to all three Allied Governments the military information obtained from the Hungarians (reEmbs 14, January 2)? In apprising the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the present state of the negotiations the Department would like to be able to inform them on this point.