874.00/12–345: Telegram
The United States Representative in Bulgaria (Barnes) to the Secretary of State
[Received December 4—4:32 p.m.]
730. If it were not for possible effect on local political situation of Tito’s precedent in proclaiming Yugo Republic on Nov 29 and what that action may imply in the way of decision by Russia to follow policy of “aggressive isolationism”, I would consider it still course of wisdom for US Govt to rest on statement contained in note of Nov 16 to Bulgarian Govt (replying to Deptel 388, Nov 2928).
Every time Russians “get away” with saying “no” to US and UK, fact is exploited locally to enhance Russian and Communist prestige and to undermine morale of opposition. However, effect of Tito’s precedent especially on local extremists cannot be overlooked. (Please see mytels 72629 and 72730). It is, therefore, perhaps safer not to risk possibility of surprise action by National Assembly when it convenes Dec 14. Possible further new factor is that govt and Russians know true facts about Nov 18 election returns. I cannot assert it as fact but I do have reason to suspect that results were really disappointing to govt and Russians despite all pre-election pressure brought to bear by them.
Should Dept seeing picture not only as it presents itself from Sofia and Moscow but from all eastern Europe as well decide to act in sense of Moscow’s telegram 3859,31 I believe that procedure should be eased on recognition that under present circumstances it would be vain to hope to free Ministries of Interior and Justice from grasp of Communists and therefore that hope of adherence to FF program by all democratic parties would be equally vain. Also I feel that our démarche at Moscow and subsequently here should be so contrived as to provide opposition with future electoral slogan of positive nature; this should, in my opinion, be “restitution of constitutional rights and liberties”. I, therefore, suggest that proposals set forth in Moscow’s 3859 and my 71632 be revised to following: We and British to appeal to Russia on basis of Yalta declaration to join in démarche to Bulgarian Govt requesting immediate return to Tirnovo constitution specifying as test of compliance:
- 1.
- Restriction of present legislative program to (a) passage of budget law; (b) legalization of decree laws from Sept 9, 1944 and revision of electoral law and law for defense of people’s authority in accordance with recommendations by committees composed of representatives [Page 403] of recognized parties; (c) voting of general amnesty with respect to all political acts subsequent to Sept 1, 1944.
- 2.
- Neutralization of Ministries of Interior and Justice either through appointment of non-party ministers or formula whereby non-Communist parties afforded participation in administrative police and judicial processes on basis of their representation in forthcoming and subsequent national assemblies.
- 3.
- Local administrative elections to be held almost immediately and general election for new National Assembly not later than May 1. Newly elected Assembly to decide question of necessity for calling Grand National Assembly.
The foregoing would have merit of emphasizing importance of constitutional rather than revolutionary procedure and of placing our representations, if after taking original soundings at Moscow we were compelled to act without Russia, on importance of constitutional liberties rather than on existence of opposition and other factors of internal and external politics. It is a course also that would be strongly supported by two of the three Regents.
I feel that I should stress once more importance of having United Kingdom join in whatever action is decided upon. I consider failure of UK to restate its position before Nov 18 election to have weakened situation here from our standpoint. This failure has encouraged govt to hope that British are veering toward compromise at expense of Yalta even if US is not. It has also disconcerted opposition considerably. I fear that second instance of British silence would shrivel perhaps even disastrously will and determination of those who still hope for reestablishment of civil and human liberties in Bulgaria.
Whether in final analysis Bulgarian Govt facilitates application of Yalta formula to Bulgaria or not will of course depend almost entirely on Moscow. Biryusov said to secretary of Regency Council on afternoon of Nov 29, “Isn’t it high time Bulgaria takes its future into its own hands”, meaning of course go now and do likewise. Later same evening he said to Regent Ganev that he saw no reason why Bulgaria should make such haste as to ignore its constitution. It is obvious that he had not by then received Bulgaria’s “marching orders” but if I know anything about the Russians as a result of having observed them here for a year now I have no doubt that Biryusov will receive directives for Bulgaria well in advance of the opening of Parliament. “Speech from Throne” will be drafted by end of this week. I should say that end this week also is outside date for any representations that Dept may decide to make at Moscow preparatory to making representations here before meeting of assembly. I, therefore, suggest immediate consultation between Washington and London.
I am sure Mr. Ethridge’s comments on this telegram will prove illuminating and most helpful.
Repeated to Moscow as 331; sent to Dept as 730.