Foreign Relations of the United States, 1948, Eastern Europe; The Soviet Union, Volume IV

840.811/12–648

Memorandum by the Assistant Secretary of State for Transportation and Communications (Norton) to the Under Secretary of State (Lovett)

secret

[Washington,] December 6, 1948.

Reference is made to my memoranda to you of September 16,¹ and October 14, 1948 and to Mr. Hickerson’s memorandum to you of September 28, 1948.²

There is attached a copy of Mr. Tuthill’s memorandum of November 17, 1948 to Mr. Hickerson in which the British objection to sending notes is explained and the over-all question of timing of the notes is raised. There is also attached Mr. Hickerson’s reply of November 24, 1948, giving his view that the present does not offer a proper time for sending a note.

I concur in the view that the present does not offer a desirable time to send a provocative note on this subject. Some of the action originally contemplated in my memorandum of September 16, 1948 has been completed. Mr. Thorp has made a statement on the issue at the current session of UN.³ OMGUS, USFA, and ECA have been advised that care should be taken not to recognize either the validity of the Belgrade Convention or any commission that may be set up under it and have also been advised of our policy of encouraging reciprocal agreements on the River. The entire problem has been discussed with the British and French, but, in the absence of an agreement on sending out protest notes, discussions have not been held with the Italians, Belgians or Greeks. The Voice of America broadcasts have used Danube material, but have not had the ammunition of a protest note to use in their broadcasts to Europe. The French and British have been advised that we would support a move on their part to obtain an advisory opinion from the International Court, but they have not as yet given any indication that they plan such action.

In agreeing that a strong protest should not be sent at this time, I am strongly of the view that such a note may well be appropriate at some future time. Consideration is being given to the advisability, at a later date, of suggesting to the former parties to the ’21 Convention that they either reconstitute the prewar Danube Commission or call a conference of all its signatories to draw up a convention which might control the upper parts of the River and claim jurisdiction over the entire River.

Accordingly, I recommend that our original policy statement of September 16, 1948 be amended to allow for postponement of the issuance of a note of protest, but urge that the entire matter be carefully reviewed at a later date, (1) after further attempts are made on the Austrian treaty and (2) in the light of future Soviet action in connection with its Danube Commission.

Garrison Norton

1. Not found in Department of State files; see, however, the circular telegram of September 30, and the memorandum of October 14, 1948, by Assistant Secretary of State Norton, p. 724 and p. 725, respectively.
2. Latter not printed.
3. For the remarks made by Mr. Thorp on November 10, 1948, in the Economic Committee of the United Nations General Assembly, see the Department of State Bulletin, November 14, 1948, p. 616.