Office of the Historian

740.00119 Potsdam/7–2645

No. 819
The First Secretary of Embassy in Portugal (Cannon) to the Director of European Affairs (Matthews)1
[Extract2]
[Babelsberg,] July 26, 1945.

Memorandum

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

If any of the delegations are willing to accept this text,3 note that either the British or the Soviet representative will propose a suitable passage to cover Finland.

[Page 720]

If we accept something along the lines of the foregoing text, the title must be changed. We might propose:

Statement on Allied Control Commission Procedure in Rumania, Bulgaria, Hungary (and Finland).

Copies of the Soviet proposals [on revising the procedures of the Allied Control Commissions in Bulgaria, Hungary, and Rumania], to which reference is made above have been handed to us here. Translations of these for Hungary and Rumania are attached.4 We have been informed that the proposals for Bulgaria5 and Finland are identical with those for Rumania.

By way of comment it may be said:

1.
Our representatives on the Allied Control Councils as well as the Department, seem to think these proposals give us most of what we wanted. I agree.
2.
We have in mind some requests for elucidation as well as some desirable additions. We might submit them to the Soviet Delegation here in the form of a personal letter. Though we could hardly expect a reply here, this would perhaps be better tactics than to start fresh through diplomatic channels. I think we could prepare a statement of these items in a couple of hours. Can we handle here the question of concurrence of the Joint Chiefs? If not, the delay of clearance through the Department might make it too late to get the letter into Soviet hands before the Conference closes.
3.
The Soviet proposal for Hungary would give us what purports to be a status of concurrence in decisions of the Allied Control Council, i. e., a fairly full tripartite status in matters of policy at least. In working for revision we should try to obtain this same status as regards Rumania and Bulgaria, thus achieving uniformity in a region where our interests are identical for the three countries, and where the military reasons for a distinction no longer apply.
4.
We may have to make some concession from our position of full tripartite participation. The substance of our desiderata would be achieved, however, if we obtain effective consultation prior to the issuance of directives.

  1. Printed from an unsigned carbon copy.↩
  2. For the portions of this memorandum summarizing the Third Meeting of the Subcommittee on Implementation of the Yalta Declaration on Liberated Europe, July 26, see ante, p. 417.↩
  3. The text referred to is the quoted paragraph printed ante, p. 418.↩
  4. For the attached paper relating to Hungary, see document No. 796. Concerning the Soviet proposals relating to Rumania, see document No. 797.↩
  5. See vol. i, document No. 309.↩