740.0011 Moscow/10–1943
Conference Document No. 25
[Translation]
Mr. Boris Fedorovich
Podtserob of the Soviet Delegation to Mr. Charles E. Bohlen of the American
Delegation
Moscow, October 25,
1943.
Dear Mr. Bohlen: In connection with the
discussion which took place at the session of the Conference on October
24 concerning the “Question of Agreement between major and minor Allies
on Post-war Questions”, by instruction of the People’s Commissar of
Foreign Affairs I am transmitting to you, for the Secretary of State,
copies of the memoranda of the Embassy of the U.S.S.R. in Great Britain
addressed to the Foreign Office on July 26 and August 30, 1943.
With sincere respect,
[Page 728]
[Enclosure 1—Translation]
Memorandum
In connection with a communication of the President of the
Czechoslovak Republic, Mr. E. Beneš, stating that in a conversation
with him Mr. A. Eden had referred to an agreement existing between
the Soviet Union and Great Britain not to conclude, prior to the end
of the war, any treaties on post-war problems with other European
states whose territories were occupied by the Germans, and having in
mind that such a statement concerning an agreement does not
correspond to the facts, the Soviet Government considers it
necessary to set forth the actual status of this question.
On June 9 of last year, during Mr. Molotov’s stay in London, in
connection with the question raised by the Yugoslav Government
regarding the conclusion of a new Soviet-Yugoslav agreement, Mr.
Eden proposed that the Soviet Union and Great Britain agree not to
conclude treaties on post-war questions with other states in Europe
whose governments are in exile, without prior mutual consultation
and agreement. V. M. Molotov promised to study this question and to
report to the Soviet Government concerning this proposal.
On July 15 of last year, through the Soviet Ambassador in London Mr.
Eden was informed that the Soviet Government agreed in principle
with his proposal, but at the same time it was pointed out that the
Soviet Government would like to receive from the Government of Great
Britain concrete proposals concerning this question. However, no
concrete proposals from the Government of Great Britain followed
subsequently, and thus the entire matter was confined to merely a
preliminary exchange of views.
The Soviet Government considers it its duty to note that relations
between the Soviet Union and Great Britain are defined by the Treaty
of May 26, 1942, which contains no obligations concerning abstention
from concluding agreements with other countries on post-war
questions. It goes without saying that that Treaty may serve as a
basis for subsequent Anglo-Soviet agreements on these questions as
well.
[Enclosure 2—Translation]
Memorandum
On July 26 the Soviet Chargé d’Affaires in London, A. A. Sobolev,
handed to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Great Britain, Mr.
Eden, a memorandum setting forth the circumstances relating to Mr.
Eden’s proposal that the Soviet Union and Great Britain should not
conclude treaties on post-war questions with other states in Europe
whose governments
[Page 729]
were
outside the boundaries of their territories, without mutual
consultation and agreement. The memorandum further pointed out that
the Soviet Ambassador in London, I. M. Maisky, under instruction of
the Soviet Government, had informed Mr. Eden in July 1942 that the
Soviet Government agreed in principle with Mr. Eden’s proposal, but
it was pointed out at the same time that the Soviet Government would
like to receive from the Government of Great Britain concrete
proposals regarding this question. However, these concrete proposals
were not received from the Government of Great Britain.
On August 23 of this year the Ambassador of Great Britain, Mr. Kerr,
in reply to the above-mentioned memorandum of the Soviet Government,
handed to the People’s Commissar of Foreign Affairs, V. M. Molotov,
a memorandum, in point two of which it was stated that Mr. Eden did
not recall I. M. Maisky’s having declared that the Soviet Government
was awaiting concrete proposals on this question from the Government
of Great Britain. In this connection, the Soviet Government has
again checked over the data at its disposal, from which it follows
that I. M. Maisky had in due course reported to the People’s
Commissariat of Foreign Affairs that such a statement had been made
by him to Mr. Eden in July of last year.
In this memorandum it is also stated that the Government of Great
Britain would be prepared to renew its proposal of June 9, that the
two Governments agree together, relative to undertaking an
obligation to observe a condition under which they would refrain
from entering into agreement with any of the allied countries whose
governments were at present in exile.
Thus, the new proposal of the Government of Great Britain likewise is
only general in character and does not include any concrete points.
Inasmuch as the Soviet Government had, already in July 1942, stated
to the Government of Great Britain that it agreed in principle with
Mr. Eden’s proposal of June 9 of last year and had asked the
Government of Great Britain to communicate its concrete proposals on
this question, the Government of the U.S.S.R. considers it necessary
again to confirm its view that it is desirable to pass from general
statements to the examination of a concrete Soviet-British agreement
on the above-mentioned question. Accordingly, the Soviet Government
asks to have explained whether a concrete draft agreement, in the
spirit of the proposal made by Mr. Eden, will be presented, for
joint examination, on the part of the Government of Great Britain,
to which the initiative in this question belongs.
In addition, in connection with Mr. Kerr’s memorandum, the Soviet
Government requests elucidation on the following question.
In Mr. Kerr’s memorandum it is stated that the Government of Great
Britain proposes that an agreement be made by which the two
[Page 730]
Governments would refrain
from entering into agreements with any of the above-mentioned allied
countries; this proposal differs in two respects from Mr. Eden’s
proposal of last year. In Mr. Eden’s proposal reference was made
only to such agreements as deal with postwar questions. The
memorandum, however, refers to agreements, without making any
reservation regarding post-war questions, in this respect diverging
from Mr. Eden’s proposal. In Mr. Eden’s proposal there was reference
to the two parties agreeing not to conclude agreements of the
above-mentioned character with other allied countries in Europe
without mutual consultation and agreement. In the memorandum,
however, it is proposed, in general, not to conclude agreements with
these states, a point which likewise is in contradiction with Mr.
Eden’s proposal of last year.
