641.0131/12–2947: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Embassy in the United Kingdom
127. Embtel 6640, Dec 29.1 Department has decided to issue no formal statement re Anglo-Soviet agreement but since question likely to be asked in ERP hearings it is proposed Ambassador Douglas reply along following lines: The trade arrangement brings to UK substantial supplies of commodities greatly needed by British economy, not available west hemisphere even though financial resources might be provided. Therefore, represents net gain by UK and by CEEC area. Also opens way to acquisition by UK of additional commodities such as timber from USSR, not elsewhere available and urgently needed. Commodities which UK is scheduled to make available in return will doubtless contribute to Soviet productivity and may have indirect effect upon Soviet ability to make goods available for export to west Europe. This particularly pertinent re timber cutting machinery. If agreements of this kind between east and west Europe are on good terms of trade, objectives of European recovery are well served, (end proposed reply)2
Department considers it inadvisable to make any comment on Anglo-Soviet arrangement for war supplies payments. It is felt British were obliged to take an unfavorable settlement in this field, and position of US regarding settlement of lend-lease accounts with USSR should not be overlooked.3
- Not printed: the reference here is to the Agreement between the Soviet Union and the United Kingdom on the Question of Trade and Finance, signed December 27, 1947 in Moscow. For the text of this Agreement, see United Nations Treaty Series, vol. 91, pp. 113–135.↩
- The substance of this message was communicated to R. M. A. Hankey of the Foreign Office, who had made the original request for a statement.↩
- For documentation on the status of the lend-lease accounts with the Soviet Union, see vol. iv, pp. 950 ff.↩