Foreign Relations of the United States, 1949, Eastern Europe; The Soviet Union, Volume V

711.4027/9–2849: Telegram

The Chargé in the United Kingdom (Holmes) to the Secretary of State

secret
priority

London, September 28, 1949—6 p. m.

3888. A. Foreign Office has replied US proposal re status Yugoslavia in civil aviation (Deptels 2998, August 22¹ and 3272, September 9²) along following lines (Barringer bringing full text Foreign Office letter and copies pouched Belgrade and Bern):

1. No security objection excluding Yugoslavia from scope our joint civil aviation policy to extent allow Yugoslav air services operate to western Europe without immediate reciprocity,

2. Any agreements with Yugoslavia covering such services should be capable immediate denunciation and should provide for reciprocity.

3. “No objection to export civil aircraft and associated equipment to Yugoslavia provided (a) qualities and quantities are restricted to those necessary for operation of approved airlines, and to allow for reasonable development of air communications, and (b) no classified information or equipment above “restricted” is given Yugoslavia.

B. Embassy has discussed matter in detail with Foreign Office with following specific points emerging:

1. In A.1. above “without immediate reciprocity” means arrangement must include exchange reciprocal rights but other country need not actually operate to Yugoslavia.

2. At time Foreign Office letter written, points in section A above were JCS [British Chiefs of Staff] recommendations, generally endorsed by Foreign Office. Latter now advises it fully concurs JCS views in detail. Foreign Office also feels we should strongly urge any government entering air transport arrangement with Yugoslavia do so through exchange notes and avoid signing usual form bilateral.

3. In A.3. above “operation of approved airlines” intended mean “purpose approved by exporting country”.

4. “Reasonable development” would allow for Yugoslav operation of additional services which might result from our modified attitude, and for improved standards Yugoslav operations if such felt desirable.

5. Since exports to be handled under 1–A procedure, question arises how limit to reasonable amount total aviation exports to Yugoslavia. If for example. Yugoslavia needs ten engines and asks four different countries for them, might she not get forty?

6. Timing of our respective approaches to third countries important. We must avoid presenting French and other cooperating countries with fait accompli in modifying our policy, particularly re exports equipment.

7. Difficulties will probably arise in attempt differentiate between civil and military use aircraft and parts.

8. SEems probable new attitude re air transport rights will meet with little or no objection and cause few difficulties. Problem re exports much more complicated and appears advisable proceed with more caution. Foreign Office proposes we inform other governments at once on air transport aspect (after resolving our own differences). They feel that re exports, however, our respective missions should be instructed sufficiently in advance to permit their informing other governments two weeks in advance date US and UK consider modified policy in effect.

C. Before further action can be taken, following questions must be answered. Does US agree with British viewpoint that:

1. Air transport arrangements with Yugoslavia should be effected by exchange of notes and not through bilateral agreements?

2. Such arrangements should be subject to “immediate” rather than “short term” cancellation?

3. Exports of civil aircraft and associated equipment may be permitted to extent necessary allow for reasonable development Yugoslav air communications?

4. Revised transport policy should be effective at once, but third countries should have two weeks advance notice revised policy re exports?³

D. New item. Yugoslav official told British Embassy Belgrade Yugoslavia considering joining ICAO. Foreign Office believes may be desirable warn Yugoslavia against signing two freedoms agreements hi view fact Czechoslovakia already party thereto.⁴

Sent Department 3888, Belgrade 78; repeated Bern 104, Paris 736, Eome 159, The Hague 164.

Holmes

1. Ante, p. 211.
2. Not printed. It stated that the proposed modification of civil aviation policy toward Yugoslavia did not envisage the exportation of military aircraft or components to Yugoslavia. The exportation of aviation equipment, parts, and fuels would be restricted to those minimum quantities required to maintain the Yugoslav civil aviation fleet at its current level (711.4027/9–949).
3. Telegram 3592, October 3, to London, not printed, stated that the Department of State concurred with the British plan for notifying the appropriate missions on the revised aspects of the civil aviation policy toward Yugoslavia. Implementation of the export phase of the policy was to be postponed pending the clarification with the British of mechanical aspects of the export control procedure (711.4027/9–2849).
4. Telegram 3723, October 14, to London, not printed, stated that the Department of State shared the British view that Yugoslavia should be warned against signing a two-freedoms agreement (711.4027/9–2849).