711.60F/12–2149: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Embassy in Czechoslovakia
1234. We have given careful thought to proposal set forth ur 1873 Dec 211 re Slansky’s attack US Emb and feel fol considerations important in deciding whether official US reaction advantageous:
[Page 431]- 1.
- Charges fall into propaganda pattern being currently applied against US in all Sov bloc countries. We are inclined to feel that, except in very special cases, to respond to such charges by official representations would be to dignify them unnecessarily. This is particularly true of articles in Cominform Journal.
- 2.
- Dept has protested fruitlessly so many times in recent dealings with Sov bloc countries that we are becoming increasingly disinclined to protest unless prepared to follow up with concrete retaliatory action if protest is unavailing. We question whether Slansky charges are sufficiently important to warrant retaliatory action.
- 3.
- Is there not possibility that Slansky charges, even though unfounded, may have effect not intended by author in emphasizing to Czechs our basic antagonism toward present Communist regime?
We had prepared very brief comment on these charges for use by Sec if questioned at press conference yesterday but charges have elicited little interest US and no question was asked.
In circumstances we are inclined to favor, in place of official protest, ironic treatment by VOA in context entire Sov bloc propaganda campaign against US in course of which occasion wld be taken to indicate absurdity of Slansky’s statements and inconsistency between charges against Emb and Czech reply to our note on Patch case,2 (Ur 1872, Dec. 20.3)
Wld appreciate your comments soonest, whether in light considerations outlined above, you consider this treatment to be adequate.4
- On December 20 Rude Pravo, the official organ of the Czechoslovak Communist Party, reprinted the full text of an article by Rudolf Slánský, the General Secretary of the Czechoslovak Communist Party, which originally had appeared in the December 16 edition of For a Lasting Peace For a People’s Democracy, the organ of the Communist Information Bureau. In his telegram 1872, December 21, from Praha, not printed, Ambassador Briggs characterized Slánský’s article as the bluntest public statement to date directly linking the American and British Embassies in Czechoslovakia to alleged acts of espionage, sabotage, and attempts to overthrow the government. Briggs regarded the article as part of a mounting campaign intended to intimidate the Czechoslovak population from maintaining any kind of contact with Western Embassies in Praha (124.60F6/12–2049). In his telegram 1873, December 21, not printed, Briggs proposed that Slánský’s article be used as the pretext to lodge a strong protest against the allegations of Embassy-directed anti-state activity in Czechoslovakia. Briggs considered it important to take a firm stand on the Slánský attack lest the United States give the impression of reluctance due to self-consciousness about guilt (711.60F/12–2149).↩
- Regarding the exchange of notes in the case of Assistant Attaché Patch, see telegram 1081, October 26, to Praha, p. 411.↩
- Not printed, but see footnote 1 to this document.↩
- In his telegram 1894, December 23, from Praha, not printed, Ambassador Briggs agreed that on the basis of the broad considerations outlined by the Department the disadvantages of an official American reaction to Slansky’s accusations might outweigh the advantages, and he suggested that the matter be dropped. Briggs also counselled against raising the issue on the Voice of America broadcasts (711.60F/12–2349). In telegram 1240, December 28, to Praha, not printed, the Department concurred in Briggs’ suggestions (711.60F/12–2349).↩