740.00119 EW/10–2544: Telegram
The Acting Secretary of State to the Ambassador in the Soviet Union (Harriman)
92. ReDeptel 2764, December 1. If it is decided to give consideration to points recommended by the Czechoslovak and Yugoslav Governments for inclusion in the armistice terms for Hungary, the Department has the following comments to make on the three points raised by the Czech Ambassador reported in your 87 January 9:
- (1)
- Already covered by Article XIX;
- (2)
- The Department sees no useful purpose in delaying the armistice for the study that would be required to determine with assurance [Page 976] the advisability of referring to this particular date in the text of the Armistice Agreement;
- (3)
- The Department would not press for this provision but is willing that a sentence be added to the second paragraph of Article V providing that Hungary should accept as Hungarian nationals and residents all Magyars who may be transferred to Hungary from neighboring Allied states as a consequence of agreements reached among the Governments of the USSR, the United Kingdom, the USA and Allied states immediately concerned. For your confidential information the Department does not favor any large-scale expulsion of Magyars from Czechoslovakia and believes that such transfers as do take place should be carried out only after agreement between Czechoslovakia and the principal Allied Governments;
- (4)
- As no occupation of Hungarian territory by small Allied states is contemplated, no provision need be made for Czechoslovak occupation of any part of Hungary.
The principal additional requests made by Czechs in documents submitted to the EAC in London may be summarized as follows:
- 1.
- Recognition of the nullity of all agreements between Hungary and the so-called Slovak State;
- 2.
- Recognition of the nullity of the incorporation of Ruthenia and Eastern Slovakia into Hungary;
- 3.
- Immediate renewal of provisions of international regime on Danube so far as it affects Hungarian territory.
The Department does not see the necessity of including any of these points in the armistice agreement, but would have no objection to the inclusion of the first and the second in the form of an addition to Article XIX worded along the lines of the last part of Article II of the Bulgarian Armistice. The third point is properly a matter for later international agreement and does not appear to be appropriate for inclusion in an armistice with one Danubian state.
The Department considers that the remaining points mentioned in the Czechoslovak Government’s documents are either covered by the armistice terms as they now stand or are inappropriate for inclusion.