868.00/9–1747: Telegram
The Chargé in Greece (Keeley) to the Secretary of State
priority
niact
1608. During conversation yesterday with Tsaldaris I referred to Sophoulis comment to press that his statement in ministerial declaration concerning international guarantee of amnesty was merely “symbolic” (mytel 1518 [1598], September 151) and inquired whether this meant that Government had given up idea of international supervision. Tsaldaris replied that Government was still considering whether to internationalize supervision and, if so, when and by what agency. There was disposition on part of some Greek officials, he said, to proceed with amnesty under Greek supervision2 for its initial period of month and to fall back on international supervision if former procedure fails of results and Government decides to extend period another month as provided in amnesty law. He admitted that calling upon international guarantee, only if guarantee of Greek Government fails to bring rebels to heel, might result in severe loss of prestige unless [Page 343] perhaps it could be used as a bargaining measure, that is, Government might offer to provide impartial guarantors if rebels would thereupon agree to cease rebellion. I called his attention to the time it takes to organize an international observation, as illustrated by AMFOGE, and suggested that if any type of international supervision is to be used at all, preliminary steps, at least, would seem to be called for without delay. Tsaldaris agreed but I am certain no Greek has any real appreciation of the time-consuming effort such things involve.
Tsaldaris expressed view that use of any international group that included Russians or satellites would probably be inadvisable since experience has shown that their energies are directed toward obstruction and sabotage which would add a still further disturbing element to already complicated internal situation. He wondered whether AMAG might not be willing and in position to undertake the task or, if not, whether British military mission might not take it on, saying that as the law is itself broadest possible guarantee there remains only insurance to the rebels that law will be faithfully administered. As enforcement largely matter for police and judicial authorities a few impartial legal experts might be assigned from AMAG or British military mission to check performance. Some had suggested idea of requesting International Court to undertake the supervision if its terms of reference would permit, and he had also considered asking neutral nations, such as Switzerland or Sweden. He requested my frank opinion on subject.
Making clear that my views were tentative and personal, I suggested that use of AMAG was open to objection on two points, first, it would involve AMAG in political controversies which might well detract from accomplishment its primary economic objective and second, the rebels would probably consider AMAG an agency of “imperialist America” and not as an impartial body in which they could have full confidence. Use of British military mission would be open to similar criticism of bias and partiality. Use of UN or other international agency which might include Russians or satellites, I agreed, was apt to result in interminable delays and obstruction which might defeat purpose of amnesty and cause loss of prestige to coalition Government. International Court, I felt, might not be equipped to undertake this kind of operation. Alternative worth exploring, I suggested, was use of small group of Swiss and/or Swedes who might be counted on to be impartial and to inspire confidence among rebels. I reiterated these were personal views but that I would be glad to consult Governor Griswold and my Government on subject.
I immediately arranged meeting with Griswold, McGhee and pertinent members AMAG staff, all of whom agreed that this was not kind [Page 344] of venture into which AMAG should be drawn. Griswold was inclined toward view that best alternative was use of neutrals such as Swiss and Swedes.
As Tsaldaris, scheduled depart Saturday September 20, said, he would appreciate soonest any views Department may care to express to guide Government’s consideration this important matter.
We here are of opinion that everything possible should be done to encourage Greeks to carry out faithfully and expeditiously what appears to be sincere amnesty offer in contrast to past half-hearted and poorly executed gestures. If rebels can be induced to submit in appreciable numbers restoration of order will be facilitated and AMAG task made easier. They are not likely to submit, however, unless they have full confidence that amnesty offer is genuine and its application honest. International or other impartial supervision, therefore, takes on peculiar psychological importance. Since time is of essence, it seems to me Greek Government should invite small group impartial observers of some sort to come here without delay and without elaborate time-consuming preparation with view to assuring to rebels faithful execution by Greeks of their own adequate amnesty law under their own direction rather than with idea of instituting procedures or making foreigners instrument for actual execution of amnesty. Such group could receive complaints and make on-spot investigation. Knowledge that such impartial inquiries would be undertaken would put local Greek enforcing officials on their good behavior and should carry conviction to men in mountains. The “symbolic” effect of such a guarantee would seem to promise maximum value only if offered before this amnesty has an opportunity to go the way of all others.
- Not printed.↩
- In telegram 1616, September 17, the Embassy in Athens transmitted to the Department a translation of the Prime Minister’s amnesty proclamation which was being thrown from Royal Hellenic Air Force planes over the bandit area. The proclamation noted that the Government, the Prime Minister personally and the whole Greek people constituted a guarantee for the honest enforcement of the terms of the amnesty. (868.00/9–1747)↩