Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, Eastern Europe; Soviet Union; Eastern Mediterranean, Volume VIII

Microfilm telegram files, “Moscow FY 53”: Telegram

No. 587
The Ambassador in the Soviet Union (Bohlen) to the Department of State¹

restricted
niact

Moscow, April 25, 1953—5 p.m.

1526. Today’s Pravda carries unprecedented full first page, six columns article entitled Regarding President Eisenhower’s Speech.² Third page carries accurate and full translation President’s address.

Following main points of special interest in article:

President’s speech is taken as “some kind of reply recent statements Soviet Government re possibility peaceful solution controversial international questions”. Stating that President’s remarks regarding absence insoluble questions contrast with other statements in his speech, article takes up particular problems.

Korea: Those seeking concrete proof can assess significance Soviet support North Korean and Chinese attempts end Korean war.

Germany: President’s speech does not offer basis for solution German question. It, like previous US Government fails consider existence Potsdam Agreement. “If Anglo-American bloc does not take this into account and continue on its chosen path having rendered impossible national unification Germany and having transformed its western part into military state wherein power remains in the hands of Revanchistes, it will be a fateful mistake, . . .”.³ Question is to achieve speediest conclusion peace treaty permitting German unity and consequently withdraw occupation forces.

China: President’s address failed mention China “is not this question one of urgent international problems of our times?”

East Europe: “It would be strange to expect of the Soviet Union interference aimed toward restoration of the reactionary regime overthrown by these peoples”.

Austria: “Here also no such questions as cannot be resolved on the basis of earlier concluded agreement under conditions of genuine observance of democratic rights of Austrian people.”

UN: 60 members UN subscribers to Charter did not foresee that certain governments would ignore their decisions regarding unanimity of five great powers. “Largest country in world—China—is deprived of possibility of participation . . .” “In any event impossible avoid solution this question as also series other international problems which have developed. If we are striving that there should be less words and more action then obviously it must be possible to find a way toward solution of problems of this nature.”

“Fund for World Aid”: “Dynamic aims USA foreign policy” foreshadows continuation “Marshall Plan”, “Truman’s Point Four”. As indicated by Burmese rejection [garble] economic aid, world demands removal by US of obstacles to development of normal trade.

Article’s sharpest language is used in reference speech Secretary Dulles⁴ “two days after Eisenhower’s address”. Soviet policy is determined by the interests of the Soviet people, interests of peace and international security and not by toughness or softness of policy of US or other governments. “In view of such statements of official representatives of USA it is difficult judge just what is actual foreign policy position of USA at present time”, whether it wishes relieve tension or continue rearmament policy. “In opinion Soviet leaders, proposals actually directed toward peace can serve as basis for improvement international relations. This however does not mean that Soviet leaders are prepared accept as such proposals new variations of old recipes”.

Postwar International Relations: President distorted truth in attempt show that Anglo-American bloc policies have been directed toward peace. President showed amounts expended on various war equipment “but what is said by the President is completely insufficient. Had President of USA spoken about the cost to the American people of accumulation of reserves of atom bombs and also construction of many hundreds of military bases far beyond the borders of the USA and perhaps how all this has nothing in common with any kind of defense interests of the USA then there would be revealed a picture much closer to reality and considerably more instructive.”

Disarmament: Soviet Government has no objection to five points mentioned by President “however all these proposals are too general in nature”. War fear exists in US not USSR.

US–USSR: “We have no intention of entering into a discussion with the President concerning the rather strange statement about some kind of end of an era in Soviet policy . . .” “New President USA himself for some reason unconditionally undertakes to defend the whole policy of his predecessor which at one time particularly in the period of election campaign he criticized in many respects and not without foundation . . .” In his speech the President of the USA for some reason considered it necessary to tie his proposals regarding peace to a whole series of preliminary conditions presented by him to the Soviet Union although these claims in his speech are not strengthened by appropriate obligations on the part of the USA . . .” “As is known Soviet leaders do not tie their appeal for peaceful settlement of international problems to any preliminary demands of the USA or other country, either connected with or not connected with the Anglo-American bloc. Does this mean that the Soviet side has no claims? Of course it does not mean this. Nevertheless the Soviet leaders will welcome any step on the part of the Government of the USA or the government of another country if it is directed toward amicable settlement of controversial questions. This testifies to the readiness of the Soviet side for serious, businesslike discussions of appropriate problems by means of direct negotiation as well as in necessary instances within the framework of the UN”. The President’s statement regarding US willingness to assume just part “was not strengthened in any way in Eisenhower’s speech of April 16. It (the speech) is actually lacking in this respect”.

Bohlen

1. Repeated for information to Secretary Dulles in Paris.
2. Document 583. For full text of the Pravda article of Apr. 25, translated into English, see Current Digest of the Soviet Press, May 16, 1953, pp. 3 ff. For extracts from the article, see Documents (R.I.I.A.) for 1953, pp. 51–57.
3. All ellipses are in the source text.
4. Secretary Dulles addressed the American Society of Newspapers Editors on Apr. 18. For text of his address, see Department of State Bulletin, Apr. 27, 1953, pp. 603–608.