740.00119 EW/10–344: Telegram
The Acting Secretary of State to the Chargé in the Soviet Union (Kennan)
2752. The British Embassy here has given the Department the substance of the comments of the British Foreign Office on the Soviet draft of armistice terms for Hungary. Those comments were sent from London to Clark Kerr in two telegrams dated October 16 and 27. The reparations article was taken up separately and was not referred to in those telegrams. The Department’s views given below on certain points of the British commentary should serve as guidance to you, in addition to the instructions already sent by the Department, in the discussions which take place in Moscow. We are assuming that the British proposals are available to you in the same form as they have been transmitted to the Department. Articles are numbered below as in your 3933 October 13, 10 p.m.
Article 1. Department agrees that Article 1 of the Bulgarian armistice is preferable as a model to the corresponding article of the Rumanian armistice. We desire to avoid any implication that Hungary is being given the formal status of cobelligerent.
Article 5. Department would prefer a text similar to Article 4 of the Bulgarian armistice.
The British Embassy here has informed the Department that Clark Kerr has been instructed to raise with the Soviet Government the matter of a public declaration by the Hungarian Government, at the time of the signature of the armistice, regarding the treatment of refugees and displaced persons. The British originally made this proposal on September 13, with the intention of having such declarations made by Rumania, Bulgaria and Hungary. The Department’s 2232 September 1872 informed you of the proposed text and of our agreement with the purpose of the British proposal. The British have since given up the idea of having such declarations made by [Page 931] Rumania and Bulgaria but still believe it desirable in the case of Hungary. The Department considers that the obligation in question is properly one which should be incorporated in the armistice agreement with Hungary and need not be made the subject of a separate declaration. Article 5 or Article 6 would appear to be the proper place for it.
Article 7. Department agrees that this article should be amended to conform to Article 11 of the Bulgarian armistice, with specific mention of Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia.
Article 12. While the Department does not see the need for a complete redraft of this Article, we should like to see it explicitly provided that the expenses of the Allied Control Commission would be met by the Hungarian Government.
Article 18. We favor the inclusion of the words “or the Allied Control Commission” after the phrase “orders of the Allied (Soviet) High Command”. To substitute the Control Commission for the High Command in this article, as the British recommend, seems unrealistic since there may be a period, as in the case of Rumania, in which the ACC is not functioning; also, at least in the period of military operations, it is reasonable that the Soviet High Command should issue instructions for the execution of the armistice.
We do not favor the inclusion of a “general powers” clause such as the British re-wording of the remainder of Article 18 would introduce.
Article 19. With respect to the character and functions of the ACC the Department’s views remain as set forth in its 2437 October 14 midnight and 2498 October 21, 8 p.m.
In general the Department agrees with the British that “Allied Control Commission” should be substituted in the text for “Allied (Soviet) High Command” wherever, as in Articles 5, 9, 15 and 17, it is practicable and is clearly a matter of control of the execution of the armistice terms and not closely connected with the conduct of military operations.
The Department agrees with the British suggestion that an article be included providing for Allied supervision over the disposal of Hungarian assets. The Department believes this desirable because of the heavy reparations obligations which may be imposed on Hungary and because of the usefulness of such control from the standpoint of restitution and looted property problems. Since it is almost certain that the ACC will find it necessary to exercise these powers, we believe that they should be stated in the armistice terms rather than left to inference.
The Department would like to see included in the Hungarian armistice terms, or in a protocol thereto, the provisions of the protocol to the Bulgarian armistice agreement. With respect to Article 4 of that [Page 932] protocol, the view indicated in Department’s 2490 October 2173 on Bulgaria applies also to Hungary. We believe that the Hungarian Government should be obliged to pay the expenses of American missions which are there in connection with the execution of the armistice terms, but not of our political representation.
The Department expects you to present its views as set forth above and to do what you can to secure British and Russian agreement to them. As was made clear in Department’s 2498 October 21, however, we do not regard any of the points mentioned in the present telegram as sufficiently vital to warrant an inflexible stand or a reservation to our signature of the armistice.
The Department’s position on the reparations article remains as set forth in its telegrams nos. 2438 October 14, 2584 and 2585 November 2.
Sent to Moscow; repeated to London as 9978.