Malta & Crimea Conferences (ARGONAUT)

91

U.S. State Department (February 7, 1945)

Meeting of the Foreign Ministers, noon

Yusupov Palace, USSR

Present
United States United Kingdom Soviet Union
Secretary Stettinius Foreign Secretary Eden Foreign Commissar Molotov
Mr. Harriman Sir Alexander Cadogan Mr. Vyshinsky
Mr. Matthews Sir Archibald Clark Kerr Mr. Maisky
Mr. Hiss Mr. Jebb Mr. Gusev
Mr. Page Mr. Dixon Mr. Novikov
Mr. Harrison Mr. Golunsky
Major Theakstone

Page Minutes

Leningrad, February 7, 1945, noon
Top secret

Subject[s]:

  1. DUMBARTON OAKS

  2. THE DISMEMBERMENT OF GERMANY

  3. CREATION OF A COMMISSION TO STUDY THE PROCEDURE FOR THE DISMEMBERMENT OF GERMANY

  4. THE INTEGRATION OF FRANCE INTO THE GERMAN CONTROL MACHINERY ON CONDITION THAT FRANCE WERE TO RECEIVE A ZONE OF OCCUPATION

  5. REPARATIONS

Dumbarton Oaks

Mr. Stettinius inquired at the outset whether there were any questions regarding Dumbarton Oaks which the American Delegation had failed to make clear at yesterday’s plenary session. He said that if so, he was prepared to answer with his colleagues any questions which remained open or which needed to be expanded.

Mr. Molotov remarked that the World Security Organization had not been referred to the Foreign Secretaries for discussion. He continued that although he had a few questions to advance he was not prepared to go into this subject at the present time.

Mr. Stettinius stated that he was always ready now or at a later date to discuss the matter. He added that he wished merely to make the offer to discuss the question; he personally had no new points to bring up.

The Dismemberment of Germany

Mr. Molotov recalled that it had been agreed to limit the changes in Article 12 of the German surrender instrument to the addition of the words “and the dismemberment” after the word “demilitarization.” He suggested that a sub-committee consisting of British, American and Soviet representatives be appointed to work out the exact wording of Article 12.

It was decided to authorize Messrs. Vyshinski, Cadogan and Matthews to make a final redraft of Article 12 which would include the addition of the word “dismemberment” and to authorize a commission consisting of Messrs. Eden, Winant and Gusev to study the question of the procedure for the dismemberment of Germany.

Creation of a Commission to Study the Procedure for the Dismemberment of Germany

Mr. Molotov suggested that such a commission be set up in London consisting of Messrs. Eden, Winant and Gusev.

Mr. Stettinius stated that he felt the creation of this commission was a most important matter. If this question were not referred to the EAC the prestige of that body would surely be diminished. He, therefore, thought that the question of taking away this work from the EAC should be carefully considered.

Mr. Eden pointed out that if the dismemberment of Germany were included in the EAC the French would participate in this work.

Mr. Stettinius stated that it was entirely agreeable to have these studies carried on in London and to appoint Mr. Winant as the American representative.

Mr. Molotov stated that the subject under discussion was the study of procedure for dismembering Germany and not the actual dismemberment or detail thereof. Therefore, it could be assigned to a special committee. Later, perhaps, it might be handed over to the EAC.

Mr. Eden remarked that he thought that the body handling this question should go further than merely studying questions of procedure. He stated that he wished to make a few remarks on the terms of reference of that body. On the assumption that Germany was to be broken up into individual states, that body, he believed, should examine when this separation should take place; should look into boundary questions and measures needed to insure the proper functioning and survival of the new states. What relations should be permitted between them and foreign powers should also be studied. He stated that it might be necessary to request that a report be drawn up on the practicability of the dismemberment of Germany. He also questioned whether the commission was to undertake the type of work referred to in the afore-mentioned terms of reference or merely to decide how this work was to be done.

Mr. Molotov stated that he did not believe that there was any need for a special commission at this stage and suggested that the question be studied through diplomatic channels in London. He expressed doubt that the foreign secretaries had received any directive to form an actual commission.

Mr. Eden stated that they had not; however they had the power to make recommendations.

Mr. Molotov continued that he was not insisting on a commission.

Mr. Eden stated that he felt worried about the absence of the French. They were neighbors of Germany and had certain ideas on control of the Ruhr and Rhine. He felt that it would be a mistake to keep them out.

Mr. Molotov suggested that the question of French participation be subsequently decided by Messrs. Eden, Winant and Gusev in London.

Messrs. Stettinius and Eden stated that this would be agreeable.

Mr. Eden stated that in view of his many activities it might be impossible for him personally to participate in the London discussions.

Mr. Molotov stated that he of course had the right to deputize someone to represent him.

The Integration of France into the German Control Machinery on Condition that France were to receive a Zone of Occupation

Mr. Molotov submitted a statement on this matter and inquired whether it could be used for a basis of discussion.

Mr. Eden stated that since it had been agreed upon that France would receive a zone of occupation, he hoped that it might also be agreed that France would participate on the Control Commission itself. He said that he foresaw all kinds of difficulties if the French were not to participate and expressed the opinion that de Gaulle in all probability would refuse to accept a zone if he did not have the same treatment on the Control Commission as the United States, Soviet Union and Great Britain. Even if France were to accept a zone, they would always have trouble in administering it if they were not represented on the commission. He maintained that he could not see why it was any more of a departure to have France on the commission than on the EAC. He pointed out that the Prime Minister opposed enlarging the present three-power conferences; however, he could not see how the participation of France on the Control Commission would affect this view.

Mr. Molotov stated that he felt that at the present stage the question of France should be limited to the two proposals contained in the Soviet statement. If at a later date it were necessary to study French participation on the Control Commission it could be done. He felt that it was only proper that actual control should be in the hands of the three commanders-in-chief.

It was decided that the three secretaries should submit a report to the plenary session stating that: (a) it had been agreed upon to give to France a zone of occupation; and, (b) with respect to the question concerning the participation of France in the Control Commission, Messrs. Molotov and Stettinius considered it appropriate to submit this question to the consideration of the EAC, while Mr. Eden considered it appropriate to study the question at the present time and to assign to France a place on the Control Commission.

Mr. Eden stated that he believed that if France were admitted to the Control Commission the three foreign secretaries should agree that no other power should be given a zone of occupation.

Mr. Molotov suggested that there was not sufficient time to discuss that question at the present conference.

Reparations

Mr. Molotov submitted a statement on this subject and summarized it in brief. He requested Mr. Maisky to explain the considerations which formed the basis of the Soviet statement.

Mr. Maisky stated that the Soviet authorities had come to the figure of 20 billion dollars (ten billion dollars of property to be removed immediately after the war and ten billion dollars of reparations to be paid in kind over a period of ten years) the following way. The national wealth of Germany at the beginning of the war amounted to 125 billion dollars. It was figured that this national wealth would be reduced by 40 percent or less during the course of the war. Thus, the national wealth of Germany at the termination of the war would amount to 75 billion dollars. An analysis of the national wealths of the more highly industrialized countries had shown that the mobile part of this wealth which could be transferred abroad amounted to approximately 30 per cent or in the case of Germany to 22-23 billion dollars. The Soviet Government proposed to remove ten billion dollars of this mobile wealth. The remainder would be left to Germany which would secure for that country living standards comparable to those prevailing in Central Europe. These were lower than in Germany but quite decent. With respect to the second item, it had been figured that the national income of Germany before the war amounted to 30 billion dollars annually. The war would lower this income by 30-35 percent and would bring it to the neighborhood of approximately 18-20 billion. The Soviet Government proposed to take one billion dollars annually, or 5-6 per cent from the German national income. This was not a large sum and could be supported by Germany.

Mr. Eden stated that there was one point in the opening paragraph of the Soviet statement on which he wished to comment. The Prime Minister had stated that the test for reparations payments should be not only the exertion of a country in the war, but also the sufferings endured at the hands of the enemy. On either basis the Soviet Union stood well. He would like to see reference made also to the sacrifices undergone by the Allies in the first paragraph of the Soviet statement. He continued that he agreed in principle with the second paragraph of the Soviet statement. He wished, however, to give thorough study to the Soviet document before continuing discussion of it.

Mr. Molotov stated that there would be no objections to the addition in paragraph one of the words suggested by Mr. Eden.

Mr. Stettinius stated that he also wished to give a thorough study to the Soviet document. He recalled that the President at the plenary session had stated that the United States itself would not be interested in large reparations, except with respect to German foreign investments and perhaps raw materials. He expressed the hope that at this afternoon’s plenary session the foreign secretaries could report that the reparation matter had been discussed and that it had been agreed that a commission should be established in Moscow where it would immediately commence work on the question of reparations.

Mr. Molotov stated that whenever the British and American representatives were prepared, he would be ready to continue the discussions. With respect to the amount of reparations for the United States and Great Britain that was entirely the concern of those countries. However, in view of their losses, especially at sea, the Soviet Government felt that it was only just to make mention in the reparations statement of compensation going to the United States and Great Britain. He favored Mr. Stettinius’ proposal that the foreign ministers report to the plenary session that the question of reparations had been discussed, would be discussed further, and that a reparations commission would be set up in Moscow which would immediately commence work on this question.

Mr. Stettinius stated that it would be helpful for the American Delegation to know whether the subject of labor would be discussed at the Crimean Conference or at a later date.

Mr. Molotov stated that this question was very complicated, that the Soviet representatives needed time for further study on it and that they were not prepared to discuss it at the present conference. He agreed that it should be discussed by the reparations Commission in Moscow.

Mr. Molotov’s interpreter then read a second paper on the creation of the reparations commission. Mr. Stettinius stated that his Government was prepared to accept the statement on the understanding that it had not yet agreed on the principles mentioned in it.

Mr. Eden inquired whether the Moscow Reparations Commission should not also be authorized to study German industry in connection with future security and control. If this were so, he suggested that this subject be dealt with in the draft terms of reference of the commission.

Mr. Molotov maintained that the commission would deal with German industry only in connection with reparations. The question of security, of course, would always be kept in mind although it was not the principal task of the commission.

Mr. Stettinius suggested that as a practical measure the German Control Commission should have the responsibility for the control of German industry for security purposes. The Reparations Commission should, of course, coordinate its work with the policy of the Control Machinery and should establish liaison with it.

Mr. Molotov was in agreement with this proposal.

92

Matthews Notes

Leningrad, February 7, 1945, noon

Dumbarton – No clarification needed

Agenda

  1. Dismemberment. Formula Art 12. Next=Commission to study.

Mol: suggests Eden, Winant & Gousev.

Eden: on terms of reference

Mol. Perhaps no commission necessary.

Eden: Worried about absence of Fr. They are neighbors The three can decide on French participation Eden has right to deputize M: Thinks we should limit to these 2 proposals

Eden: Zone agreed on. S. M. want control machinery postponed & studied in EAC Eden wants immediate admission

Reparations

Mol. Explains paper

Maisky: Explains how figure reached ½ immed ½ in annual 1 bil. Ge. natl wealth=125 bil. before war. Reduction 40% after war 75 bil at end of war. Mobile part of natl wealth=70%=22 or 23 bil. of this 10 bil removal. This would give G. Middle European level standard of living Before war 30 bil natl income Lower by 30% after war=18 or 19 bil Propose to take 1 bil annually not big sum.

Eden: Whether exertion in war should be a basis or whether sufferings at hands of enemy. On either basis would stand well.

In general agreement on principles of Par. 2.

S. Prep, to study. As Pres said U.S. not interested except for invest possible raw materials. Hopes we can agree Com. to start immed.

M: Business of U.S. but they thought it fair. Our losses & Brit very great. Not ready to discuss at this conference. But would be studied by Moscow Commis.

E: Should Com. examine econ. security provisions

Mol: To extent necessary for reparations.

93

Hiss Notes

Leningrad, February 7, 1945, noon

2/7 12.00 meeting ERS, Molotov, Eden Amb H, Doc, Page, A. H. – Cadogan, Clark-Kerr, Jebb, Theakstone, Dixon, Harrison, ? – Vishinsky, Maisky, Gusev, Galunsky, Novikof

ERS at outset asked if there were any q’s re D. O. which we failed to make clear yesterday If so I am prepared to answer with my colleagues any q’s that may remain open & to expand in any way

Mol. Not quite prepared to ask any q’s now

ERS merely made the offer but no desire to discuss it. No new points to bring up.

Mol. Thanks

ERS Ready at any time now or later

ERS report – 1 p. by 4 p. m.

2/7 For Mins Mol. Chm

France

→Report: We are agreed that Fr. should have a zone of occupation in Ger. for occup. by Fr. forces. Mr. Mol & ERS believe q. of particip by Fr. in Control Com. should be studied by EAC. Ed. believes particip of Fr. in Con. Com should be agreed to now. [Ed would also be willing say 3 For Mins agree that if Fr. is admitted to Con. Com. no other power should be given zone]

Reparations

Mol: add 20,000,000,000 total

Principles – Eden wants add suffering to ¶ 1 Agreed by Mol. Eden in prin agrees with ¶ 2

ERS wants study memo – will do so promptly & discuss it at your pleasure. Pres. at plenary session that U S would be interested in no reparations except for. investments & perhaps raw materials Would be surprised if it would approach figure suggested. Perhaps Brit would take some of what U S gives up. Mol. up to U S & Brit.

Hopes can report we agreed Commission should be est. immediately to go to work.

Mol. ready to go on when Brit & Am. Delegs. have had time study R draft.

→Report we have discussed this q. today; Will discuss it further & agreed Com. should be est in Mos. & begin work immediately

ERS asked Mol. if wants discuss work labor here or later. Mol – may not be ready to discuss here but agreed will be discussed by Rep. Commission at Mos.

Machinery

Mol . Amendment delete “on recommend, of the Allied Com. Or on their own initiative” OK Ed. Change “may” to “shall” OK

ERS: Approves doc. On understanding we have not yet agreed on principles

Ed. Should Rep. Com. Study control of Ger. Industry for security purposes.

ERS–EAC, Rep Com, & D.O. Staff Com. All may do this

Ed. Amended suggestion: We should consider whether this Com.

ERS: Control machinery should have responsibility for control of German industry for security purposes. The Reparation Commission should, of course, coordinate its work with the policies of the Control machinery & establish liaison. Agreed.

Mol. It is bus. Not only of Com but also of 3 govts

94

Soviet Proposal on French Zone of Occupation in Germany

February 7, 1945, noon

Regarding a Separate Zone of Occupation in Germany to Be Allotted to France

  1. It has been found desirable to allot to France a separate zone of occupation in Germany for occupation by French forces.

  2. It has been decided that the French occupational authorities shall exercise control in their zone of occupation under the general guidance of the Control Council.

95

Soviet Proposal on Reparations from Germany

February 7, 1945, noon

Basic Principles of Exaction of Reparations from Germany

  1. Reparations are to be received in the first instance by those countries which have borne the main burden of the war and have organized victory over the enemy.

All other countries are to receive reparations in the second place.

  1. Setting aside for the moment the use of German labour by way of reparations, this question to be considered at a later date, reparations in kind are to be exacted from Germany in the two following forms:

a) removals in a single payment at the end of the war from the national wealth of Germany located on the territory of Germany herself as well as outside her territory (equipment, machine-tools, ships, rolling stock, German investments abroad, shares of industrial, transport, shipping and other enterprises remaining in Germany, etc.) these removals to be carried out for the purpose of military and economic disarmament of Germany.

These removals are to be completed within two years of the end of the war.

b) Annual deliveries of commodities during 10 years after the end of the war.

  1. The total sum of the German reparations in the form of removals from her national wealth as well as in the form of annual deliveries of commodities after the end of the war is fixed at 20 billion dollars.

This amount shall be distributed as follows:
a) USSR – 10 billion dollars,
b) United Kingdom and USA – 8 billion dollars,
c) All other countries – 2 billion dollars.

96

Soviet Proposal on the Establishment of an Allied Reparation Commission

February 7, 1945, noon

Regarding the Organization of an Allied Reparation Committee

The Allied Reparation Committee shall be set up on the following basis:

  1. The Committee shall consist of three representatives one from USSR, the United Kingdom and USA. Each representative shall be entitled to call in to assist in the work of the Committee any number of experts.

  2. The function of the Committee shall be to work out a detailed plan for exaction of reparations from Germany according to the principles adopted at the Crimean Conference of the Three Powers.

  3. The Governments of USSR, USA and the United Kingdom shall determine the moment when the representatives of other Allied Powers will be invited to participate in the Allied Committee as well as define the forms of participation of these Powers in the Committee.

  4. The activities of the Committee shall proceed in strict secrecy.

  5. The Allied Reparation Committee shall be established in Moscow.

97

Fourth plenary meeting, 4:00 p.m.

Livadia Palace, USSR

Present
United States United Kingdom Soviet Union
President Roosevelt Prime Minister Churchill Marshal Stalin
Secretary Stettinius Foreign Secretary Eden Foreign Commissar Molotov
Fleet Admiral Leahy Sir Archibald Clark Kerr Mr. Vyshinsky
Mr. Hopkins Sir Alexander Cadogan Mr. Maisky
Mr. Byrnes Sir Edward Bridges Mr. Gusev
Mr. Harriman Mr. Jebb Mr. Gromyko
Mr. Matthews Mr. Wilson Mr. Pavlov
Mr. Hiss Mr. Dixon
Mr. Bohlen Major Birse

Bohlen Minutes

February 7, 1945, noon
Top secret

Subject[s]:

  1. DISMEMBERMENT OF GERMANY

  2. POLAND

  3. WORLD SECURITY ORGANIZATION

  4. ZONE OF OCCUPATION IN GERMANY FOR FRANCE AND FRENCH PARTICIPATION IN THE CONTROL COMMISSION

The President said in regard to the Polish question he wished again to emphasize that he was less interested in the tracing of the frontier lines than he was in the problem of the Polish Government. He said that he did not attach any importance to the continuity or legality of any Polish Government since he thought in some years there had in reality been no Polish Government. He added that before proceeding with the Polish question he understood that Mr. Molotov had a report on the meeting of the Foreign Ministers today.

Mr. Molotov then read the results of the Foreign Ministers’ meeting, as follows:

Decisions Adopted at the Meeting of the Three Ministers of Foreign Affairs, V. M. Molotov, Mr. Stettinius and Mr. Eden

February 7, 1945

Regarding the Dismemberment of Germany

(a) A. Y. Vyshinski, Mr. Cadogan and Mr. Matthews were entrusted with the preparation of the final draft of Article 12 of the instrument “unconditional surrender of Germany” having in view the insertion in the text of Article 12 of the word “dismemberment.”

(b) The study of the question of the procedure of the dismemberment of Germany was referred to a committee consisting of Mr. Eden, Mr. Winant and F. T. Gusev.

Regarding the Zone of Occupation in Germany for France

(a) The allotment to France of a zone in Germany to be occupied by French occupational forces has been agreed upon.

(b) As regards the question of the participation of France in the Control Commission, V. M. Molotov and Mr. Stettinius feel [it] desirable to refer the question to the EAC. Mr. Eden considers it necessary to discuss this question now and to give France a place on the Control Commission.

Regarding the Reparations to be Exacted from Germany

(a) It was agreed that in the paragraph one of the Soviet proposals mention should be made of sacrifices borne.

(b) It was decided that the residence of the Reparations Committee should be in the City of Moscow. It was agreed that the Committee should begin its work immediately upon the approval of the principles of the exacting of the reparations.

(c) It was decided that the discussion of the two documents relating to the matter of the reparations which have been submitted by V. M. Molotov, first, regarding the basic principles of exacting the reparations from Germany, and, second, regarding the organization of an Allied Reparations Committee, should be continued at the Crimean Conference.

The President said that we are all grateful for the productive work of the three Foreign Ministers.

The Prime Minister added that he joined the President in thanking the Committee for their fruitful work but he said that since he had only heard their report orally he would wish to study the English translation, although, except for one point, he felt that he would be in complete agreement.

The President inquired whether the document included Mr. Eden’s reservation on France, to which Mr. Eden replied in the affirmative.

The Prime Minister stated that the British Government was unconvinced by the argument that it would be possible to accord a zone to the French without participation in the Control Commission. If the French were given a zone without participation they would cause endless trouble. If we were strict in our zones, they might be lenient in theirs and vice versa. He felt that it was of the utmost importance that there should be uniformity in the treatment of Germany by the three or four Allies. He repeated that he felt the Control Commission for Germany would be a subordinate instrument as was the case in Italy, although we recognized that the German Commission would have more important tasks. He said he wished to make it clear that he did not consider that French participation in the Control Commission would give them any right to attend a conference such as this one, at least for the time being. He said he must state frankly that he found the arguments on the subject somewhat futile since it was obvious that France would accept no zone unless they were given participation in the Control Commission and he for one thought that they were right. He felt it was no good to refer the question to the European Advisory Commission which was a weaker body and particularly as France was represented on the Commission and only a deadlock could result with the French and British on one side and the Russians and Americans on the other. He therefore was of the opinion that the matter should be settled here, but it still required further study.

Marshal Stalin inquired whether the Prime Minister meant that it should be settled now or later.

The Prime Minister answered that it should be done now, but at some later stage of this Conference.

The President then observed that would it not be better to postpone it for two or three weeks instead of two or three days.

The Prime Minister answered that he felt that once they had separated after this Conference it would be difficult to settle the question.

Marshal Stalin remarked that the three Governments had been able to settle a good many things by correspondence. Marshal Stalin then said that in the European Advisory Commission they could at least have the benefit of the French opinion which was not represented here.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The President said that he agreed that France should not join this body but he was doubtful whether this would keep them quiet. He then suggested that they go on with the Polish question.

Marshal Stalin stated that he had received the President’s letter containing the suggestion that they summon here from Lublin two representatives from the Lublin Government and two representatives from other elements of Polish public opinion and that in the presence of these four Poles they should endeavor to settle the question of a new interim government for Poland which would be pledged to hold free elections when conditions permitted. He said he noted that there were three personalities from London, namely, Mr. Mikolajczyk, Mr. Grabski and Mr. Romer, who had been mentioned by the President as possible members of this new government. He said he had received the President’s letter only an hour and a half ago and he had endeavored to reach the Lublin Poles by telephone but had been informed that they were away in Cracow and Lutz [Łódz?]. He had attempted to ascertain their opinion. As to the others, he was not sure that they could be located in time for them to come to the Crimea and he mentioned in this connection especially Vicenta Witos and Sapieha. The Marshal added that Mr. Molotov has worked out some proposals on the Polish question which appeared to approach the President’s suggestions, but that these proposals were not typed out. He suggested, therefore, that they proceed to the consideration of the Dumbarton Oaks proposal and he would ask Mr. Molotov to state the views of the Soviet Government.

Mr. Molotov said that yesterday we have heard Mr. Stettinius give a full report and explanations of the President’s proposals and that this report and explanation had been satisfactory and had made the issue clear to the Soviet Delegation. He said that they had always also followed closely Mr. Churchill’s remarks on the subject. He added that after hearing Mr. Stettinius’ report and Mr. Churchill’s remarks, which had clarified the subject, the Soviet Government felt that these proposals fully guaranteed the unity of the Great Powers in the matter of preservation of peace. Since this had been the main Soviet purpose at Dumbarton Oaks and they felt that the new proposals fully safeguarded this principle, he could state that they were entirely acceptable and that they had no comments to offer. He felt that there was full agreement on this subject. Mr. Molotov said that there was one question raised at Dumbarton Oaks, mainly [namely?] that of participation of the Soviet Republics as initial members of the World Organization. He said the Soviet views were known as were those of the British and American Governments. He said the Soviet views were based on the constitutional changes which had occurred in February of last year and he did not think that this Conference should ignore this request.

It was not the Soviet intention to raise the question in the same form as had been done at Dumbarton Oaks, but they would be satisfied with the admission of three or at least two of the Soviet Republics as original members. These three Republics were the Ukrainian, White Russian and Lithuanian and he felt that three or at any rate two should have the right to participate as original members. He said that it was superfluous to explain the size, population and importance of the Ukraine, White Russia or Lithuania or their importance in foreign affairs. He said that as these three Republics had borne the greatest sacrifices in the war and were the first to be invaded by the enemy, it was only fair, therefore, that these three or at any rate two be original members. He said that the Soviet Government put these proposals before the President and the Prime Minister and hoped that they would be accepted.

The President then inquired whether Mr. Molotov meant members of the Assembly.

Mr. Molotov replied “yes,” that they should be included among other members of that body. The Dominions of the British Commonwealth have gradually and patiently achieved their place as entities in international affairs. He said he felt that it was only right that three, or at least two, of these Soviet Republics should find a worthy place among the members of the Assembly. Their sacrifices and contributions to the war earned them this place. He said in closing that he wished to repeat that he fully agreed with the President’s proposals and withdrew any objections or amendments but would request that three, or at least two, of the Soviet Republics mentioned above be given a chance to become equal members of the World Organization.

The President said he was very happy to hear from Mr. Molotov the agreement of the Soviet Government to his proposals on voting in the Council. He felt that this was a great step forward which would be welcomed by all the peoples of the world. He said that he thought the next step was to consider the question of summoning a conference to organize the setting up of the World Organization. He said he thought that this conference could take place at the end of March, although it might be physically possible to do it within the next four weeks. He added that he had been greatly interested in what Mr. Molotov had said in regard to the participation of the Soviet Republics. He added that the British Empire, the USSR and the United States were very different in structure and in tradition. The British Empire, for example, had many large units, such as Canada, Australia, etc. The USSR had a different national structure. The United States had one language and one Foreign Minister. He felt, therefore, that Mr. Molotov’s suggestion should be studied, particularly in the light of the possibility that if the larger nations were given more than one vote it might prejudice the thesis of one vote for each member. He mentioned that certain countries are large in area, though small in population and referred in this connection to Brazil which he said was smaller than the USSR but larger than the United States. On the other hand, there were some countries that were small in area but large in population, such as Honduras and Haiti. He also mentioned the fact that there were a number of nations associated with the United Nations, such as Chile, Peru, Paraguay, Iceland, and others, which had broken relations with Germany but which were not at war. He concluded with the statement that he felt that the important thing was to proceed with the plans for a conference to set up the World Organization and that the question of the admission of countries not members of the United Nations could be considered either at that time or after the organization was in operation. He said he suggested, therefore, that the question raised by Mr. Molotov should be studied by the Foreign Ministers who might also make recommendations as to the time and place of the conference and as to what nations should be invited.

The Prime Minister said he would like to express his heartfelt thanks to Marshal Stalin and Mr. Molotov for this great step forward which he felt would bring joy and relief to the peoples of the world. On the question of membership of the Soviet Republics, he said this had been put before us for the first time. He said he must agree with the President that the United States and the British Empire were different, that during the last twenty-five years the Self-Governing Dominions have taken their place in world affairs and have worked for peace and, if he might say so, for the furtherance of Democratic processes. The Dominions had come into the war when Great Britain declared war against Germany, knowing full well the weakness of Great Britain at that time. Great Britain had had no means of forcing them into this decision and into which [sic] they knew they could not often be consulted on major matters. He said that Great Britain could not agree to any organization which would reduce the status of the Dominions or exclude them from participation. That is why, Mr. President, the Prime Minister said, he had great sympathy with the Soviet request. His heart went out to mighty Russia which though bleeding was beating down the tyrants in her path. He said he could understand their point of view, as they were represented by only one voice in comparison with the British organization which had a smaller population, if only white people were considered. He was glad, therefore, that the President had made an answer to the Soviet proposal which in no way constituted a final negation. He added, however, that he could not exceed his authority and as he had just heard this proposal he would like to discuss it with the Foreign Secretary and possibly communicate it to London and he asked Marshal Stalin to excuse him as he could not give a precise answer today.

The President remarked that his recommendations had been somewhat different. He had merely meant that the Foreign Ministers should study the question as well as that of the time and place of the conference and who should be invited.

The Prime Minister said that he did not disagree with the President’s suggestions but he felt that the Foreign Ministers had already had a good deal of work thrust upon them. He said he must speak frankly and say that he foresaw difficulties in attempting to hold a meeting as soon as March. The battle would be at its height and more soldiers would be involved than at any time of the war. British domestic problems would be very pressing and their Ministers, including the Foreign Secretary, would be greatly occupied in Parliament. He also wondered whether the state of the world and in Europe in particular was not such as to make very difficult a meeting of all of the United Nations. He doubted whether any representatives at such conference would be able to have behind them the full thought of the vital forces of their countries.

The President observed that he had only in mind a meeting to organize the setting up of the world organization, and that the world organization itself would probably not come into being for from three to six months after the conference.

The Prime Minister said that he had in mind the fact that some nations in March would still be under the German yoke and would be represented by governments in exile whose authority in regard to their own people would be questionable. Other countries would be starving and in misery, such as Holland. France would be there with a loud voice. There would be other countries represented there who had not suffered at all in the war and who had not lost a man. He wondered how such a gathering could really undertake the immense task of the future organization of the world.

The President repeated his proposal, namely, that the Foreign Ministers could consider (1) the Soviet proposal regarding membership, (2) the date and place of the conference, and (3) what nations should be invited.

The Prime Minister said he had no object[ion] to the Foreign Ministers discussing this point but he said he must emphasize that this was no technical question but one of great decision. With this qualification, he agreed to the President’s proposal.

Marshal Stalin remarked that the Foreign Ministers will not make decisions but merely report to the Conference.

There was a short intermission at this point.

The Prime Minister said that he proposed that the Foreign Ministers should consider the question of Iran and other matters of perhaps secondary importance but which should be considered.

The President and Marshal Stalin agreed.

The President then said, jokingly, that he hoped that forestry would be one of the points considered since he had not seen a tree in his visit last year to Tehran. He went on to say that he thought Iran was a good example of the type of economic problem that might confront the world if we are to bring about expansion of world trade and greater exchange of goods. He said that Persia did not have the purchasing power to buy foreign goods, and if expansion of world trade was to occur measures must be considered for helping those countries like Persia that did not have any purchasing power. He mentioned that before the advent of the Turks, Persia had had plenty of timber and thus plenty of water and her people had been reasonably prosperous, but that he personally had never seen a poorer country than Persia was at the present time. He therefore very much hoped that the new world organization would conduct a world-wide survey with a view to extending help to countries and areas that did not have sufficient purchasing power, either in cash or in foreign exchange.

The President added that there was a parallel, he thought, in Europe in that certain countries had adequate supplies of power, such as coal and water power, and those countries had cheap and abundant electric power, whereas other countries within fifty miles had neither. He felt that this situation was wrong. He mentioned that in the Soviet Union and its various republics consideration had been given to the problem of a country as a whole, and in the United States the TVA had the same idea. He mentioned that in the region of the TVA electric current was sold at the same price throughout the area. He concluded that, having said his piece, he would now refer to Mr. Molotov for his proposals in regard to the Polish question.

Mr. Molotov then read his proposals in regard to the Polish question, as follows:

  1. It was agreed that the line of Curzon should be the Eastern frontier of Poland with a digression from it in some regions of 5-8 kilometers in favor of Poland.

  2. It was decided that the Western frontier of Poland should be traced from the town of Stettin (Polish) and farther to the South along the River Oder and still farther along the River Neisse (Western).

  3. It was deemed desirable to add to the Provisional Polish Government some democratic leaders from Polish émigré circles.

  4. It was regarded desirable that the enlarged Provisional Polish Government should be recognized by the Allied Governments.

  5. It was deemed desirable that the Provisional Polish Government, enlarged as was mentioned above in paragraph 3, should as soon as possible call the population of Poland to the polls for organization by general voting of permanent organs of the Polish Government.

  6. V. M. Molotov, Mr. Harriman and Sir Archibald Clark Kerr were entrusted with the discussion of the question of enlarging the Provisional Polish Government and submitting their proposals to the consideration of the three Governments.

After reading the proposals, Mr. Molotov said he would like to add that they had attempted to reach the Poles in Poland by telephone but they had been unable to do so and it was apparent that time would not permit the carrying out of the President’s suggestion to summon the Poles to the Crimea. He said he felt that the proposals he had just put forward went far toward meeting the President’s wishes.

The President replied that he must say he felt progress had been made in the light of Mr. Molotov’s suggestions. He said there was just one word he did not like and that was “émigré.” He said he did not see any necessity to go to émigrés since you could find enough Poles in Poland for the purpose. He repeated what he had said yesterday, namely that he did not know any of the Poles in the Poland government in London and he knew only Mr. Mikolajczyk. He concluded by saying he would like to have an opportunity, with Mr. Stettinius, to study Mr. Molotov’s proposals, to which Marshal Stalin agreed.

The Prime Minister said he shared the President’s dislike of the word “émigré.” The word had originated during the French revolution and meant in England a person who had been driven out of a country by his own people. He said in the case of the Poles this wasn’t true, since they had left their country as a result of the brutal German attack. He therefore preferred in place of the word “émigré” to refer to them as “Poles temporarily abroad.” He said in regard to the second point of Mr. Molotov’s proposals he would always support the movement of Polish frontiers to the west since he felt they should receive compensation, but not more than they can handle. He said it would be a pity to stuff the Polish goose so full of German food that it got indigestion. He said he felt that there was a considerable body of British public opinion that would be shocked if it were proposed to move large numbers of Germans, and although he personally would not be shocked he knew that that view existed in England. He said he felt if it were confined to East Prussia, six million Germans probably could be handled quite aside from moral grounds, but the addition of the line west of the Neisse would create quite a problem in this respect.

Marshal Stalin remarked that most Germans in those areas had already run away from the Red Army.

The Prime Minister said this, of course, simplified the problem, and in regard to the question of space in Germany for these deported persons he felt that the fact that Germany had had six to seven million casualties in this war and would probably have a million more would simplify that problem.

Marshal Stalin replied that the Germans might well have one or possibly two million more casualties.

The Prime Minister said that he wasn’t afraid of the problem of transfer of populations provided that it was proportioned to the capacity of the Poles to handle it and the capability of the Germans to receive them. He felt, however, that it needs study, not only in principle but as a practical matter. He said he had one other comment. In the Soviet proposal some reference should be made to other democratic leaders from within Poland itself.

Marshal Stalin agreed and the words “and from inside Poland” were added at the end of paragraph 3 of the Soviet statement.

The Prime Minister then concluded that he agreed with the President that it would be well to sleep on this problem and take it up tomorrow, but he did feel that some progress had been made.

At the President’s suggestion the meeting was adjourned until four o’clock tomorrow afternoon.

98

Matthews Minutes

February 7, 1945, noon
Top secret

President: I think we should take up the Polish question. When we concluded our meeting yesterday Marshal Stalin had explained his views. I have nothing special to add to what I said yesterday. I think it is particularly important to find a solution of the governmental question. I am not so concerned with frontiers. I am likewise not so concerned on the question of the continuity of the government. There hasn’t really been any Polish government since 1939. It is entirely in the province of the three of us to help set up a government – something to last until the Polish people can choose. I discard the idea of continuity. I think we want something new and drastic – like a breath of fresh air. But before we go on with Poland I think Mr. Molotov should report to us on the meeting of the three foreign ministers.

Molotov reads his report.

Prime Minister: I wish to thank the committee for their labor. I am in general agreement with the report with a single exception. However, I should like to see in writing what has been decided as I have only now been orally informed of what took place. On the question of giving the French a zone but not a place on the control commission His Majesty’s Government remains quite unconvinced. No solution has been found for controlling the French while they are controlling the Germans. If the French decide to accept the task of having a zone and wish to be tiresome they could produce conditions in their zone which would cause trouble in the other zones. If we decide to be strict they could be lenient. If we decide to be lenient they could be strict. I firmly believe that there must be uniformity in treatment of Germany between the four allies or there will be endless bitter disputes. I regard the Allied Control Commission as a subordinate instrument to the will of the governments. In principle, it is no more than the Allied Commission in Italy but they have a much more important task. I do not think that giving France a place on the control machinery gives any right to the French to sit in on these meetings of the three of us. But all this argument seems to me futile. I feel sure that the French will take no zone unless they are given participation on the control council. I must say I think they are right. Who would they get their directions from? For this reason I feel that the proposed plan will not work. Likewise, I feel that there is no use handing over what we cannot settle here to a weaker body such as the European Advisory Commission where the French are sitting. So why not settle it here. I suggest that we should give the question further study and settle it here.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

President: Shall we go on with the discussion of Poland?

Stalin: I have received the President’s message. It contains a proposal to call from Poland two representatives of the Lublin government and two from the opposite camp, so that in our presence these four would settle the question of the new Polish government. If this is successful, the new provisional government should in the shortest possible time organize elections in Poland. This message of the President’s also proposes that some more Poles from London – Mikolajczyk, Romer and Grabski, should also take part in the new government. I received this letter an hour and a half ago. I immediately gave instructions to find Bierut and [Osóbka-]Morawski so that I could talk with them on the phone. The result was that at the moment they are outside Warsaw at Lodz or Cracow but they will be found and I must ask them how to find the representatives on the other side and what they think of the possibility of their coming. I can then tell how soon they will arrive. If Vicente Witos or Sapieha could come here it would facilitate a solution but I do not know their addresses. I am afraid we have not sufficient time. Meanwhile, Molotov has prepared a draft to meet in a certain extent the President’s proposal. Let us hear it when it arrives as the translation is not yet finished. Meanwhile, we might talk of Dumbarton Oaks.

Molotov here gave his explanation of the Russian acceptance of our voting procedure and of their request for the inclusion of three representatives in the assembly. This is being covered by Mr. Hiss’s notes.

The President made some remarks on the low purchasing power of Persians and other nations which he stated was another reason for organizing the world organization. He likewise threw out the idea of setting up a TVA for Europe. Mr. Moltov’s proposal then arrived.

Molotov: I have here the proposals which I should like to make. (He reads them.) We are still trying to telephone the Polish leaders but without success and I am afraid there will not be time for them to come to this conference. That makes it impossible to try the President’s proposal. On the other hand I think these proposals meet the President’s wishes.

President: I think we are making definite progress. I should like to wait until tomorrow to study these proposals and to talk them over with the Secretary of State and officials of the State Department. There is one word in them I do not like. That is “émigré.” It is not necessary to take *émigrés. There may be people who are now in Poland who are now satisfied. May we postpone discussion?

Stalin: Yes, certainly.

Prime Minister: I share the President’s dislike of the word “émigré.” It was applied during the French Revolution to people driven out by their own countrymen, but the Poles were driven out by a brutal enemy. With regard to the frontier on the River Neisse I should like to say a word. I have always qualified a movement west by the Poles, but say that the Poles should be free to take territory but not more than they wish or can manage. I do not wish to stuff the Polish goose until it dies of German indigestion. I also feel conscious of the large school of thought in England which is shocked at the idea of transferring millions of people by force. Personally I am not shocked but much of the opinion in England is. However, the exchange of Greeks and Turks was a great success but that only involved two million. If the Poles take East Prussia and Silesia that means moving six millions. That is manageable but there will be big arguments against it still.

Stalin: There will be no more Germans there for when our troops come in the Germans run away and no Germans are left.

Prime Minister: Then there is the problem of how to handle them in Germany. We have killed six or seven million and probably will kill another million before the end of the war.

Stalin: One or two?

Prime Minister: Oh I am not proposing any limitation on them. So there should be room in Germany for some who will need to fill the vacancy. I am not afraid of the problem of the transfer of populations as long as it is in proportion to what the Poles can manage and what can be put in the place of the dead in Germany.

I have only one other comment. It is a reference in Mr. Molotov’s plan to the utilization of some democratic leaders from émigré circles. Would Marshal Stalin be willing to add “and some within Poland itself.” This was also suggested in the President’s message.

Stalin: Yes, that is acceptable.

Prime Minister: Well, I am in agreement with the President’s suggestion that we should sleep on this till tomorrow.

Stalin: I likewise find this acceptable.

The meeting is adjourned until four tomorrow.

99

Hiss Notes

February 7, 1945, noon

“Crimea Conf.”

Plenary

2/7 4:10 p. m.

Ed Page – added to Mol. report – given to Chip

D. O.

Mol. – Yesterday heard full report from ERS We are satisfied with this report & we have got some explanations (to ask). After this report & after these explanations certain q’s became much clearer We paid much atten to what Church told us After report of ES & remarks of Church the q is considerably clarified for us In the light of these explanations & remarks we believe it would secure the unan. of 3 powers in guar. p. & sec. after the war. Our position in the qs of D. O. essentially was to secure max. of unity among 3 gt. powers in q of p & sec after the war. We believe the decs. taken at D. O & modifications suggested by Pres will secure collab by all nations great & small after war. … we consider the proposals which were presented as acceptable to us We believe that now there is reach full agt & clarity among ourselves I have to touch upon one q. which was raised in D. O. but not decided yet. This is the q about particip of Sov. Reps in the org. of sec. You know our point of view It is based on the modifs carried out in our Const. in Feb of last yr. We explained our point of view & know the point of view of US Govt & Brit Govt We consider its fair that should not pass these qs without notice but do not raise this q now in same form as in D. O.

We would consider it fair that at least 3 of our Reps or perhaps 2 be accepted as orig members. Have in mind Ukraine, Byelo Russia & Lith. Those 3 or at any rate 2 have full rts to be considered orig. members.

Ukraine’s Importance, pop., econ importance all well known I don’t want to go into detail in describing also import, of B-R & Lith also from point of view of for. rels These reps made the greatest sacrifices in this war The peoples of U,-B-R & Lith have suffered very much in this war & were 1st to be invaded Would be fair of these 3 or at any rate 2 be accepted as orig. members. The Sov Govt requests Pres & PM these 3 or at least 2 be accepted among other Un. Ns I would like to mention in this connection that the domins of Brit crown approached int. rels gradually & showed great patience. This gives us the example & reason to withdraw our orig. proposal advanced at D. O. & propose now 3 or at least 2 be accepted as orig. members. Among members of Ass. these few reps certainly should find place due them. Their role & sacrifices in this war entitle

Pres. Much gratified at what Mol. has said in acceding to the gen. plan That is making real progress. Next thing we have consider is timing What is next step. Invitations will go out to all nations that have had a place in this war

Church – the Ger War Pres Yes

Pres No use talking much further about Un Ns We are all agreed except it has not been set up. Next we should invite all nations to assemble. Gt. sentiment in US be held soon as possible – end of Mar., 1st of April

Physically repres. of Un Ns could meet in 4 wks – 1 month. Personally I think that quicker q of Un Ns meeting is determined, quicker we can take up what Mr Mol has said which is very interesting to me. But that in itself will mean the later meetings after the organ. is set up As a practical matter when we have this organizing meeting whom shall we ask? Nations in the war or those associated but not in the war. For instance shall we invite – – The assoc. nations have broken rels with Ger. but have not declared war. We Read list. We’ve got to decide who we’re going to invite What we have heard from Mr Mol. gives me a very great int. in matter of a vote for Uk, Wh. R, Lith. We 3 M. St., P. M & I have different views because our terrs. are so very different The Brit Em has great pops like Austr, Can., S Af Sov Govt has great masses of pop. like 3 areas Mol mentioned. US is contiguous – no colonies, const. provides for 1 For Min. Those things require study, require study of q of more than 1 vote for the larger nations in the world. In same way certain nations have large terrs. Brazil smaller than S. U but larger than U. S. In same way many small countries like Haiti, Honduras & we should consider whether by giving any govt more than 1 vote we would break down prin of 1 vote for each. ∴ if we can agree on gen plan for meeting to organ. U Ns we can consider these q’s by For Mins or at the meeting of the organizers

Pres: For Mins have so successful suggested q. of voting in Ass. be referred to For Mins. Also to recommend time & place of a conf.

Church: I should like to express my heartfelt thanks to Mar. St. & Sov Govt for the enormous step they have taken to put forward D. O. I’m sure the agt of the 3 gt powers such as has already been expressed around this table will give joy & relief to thinking people around the world. On the q of voting membership of the Ass., it has been put before us in quite a new form by our R. friends & allies

Everyone I’m sure will feel that here again a very remarkable advance to gen. agt. has been made. I must fully agree with the Pres that the position of the US & of the Brit Em. are different. We have our 4 selfgoverning domins, that for nearly a quarter of a century have played a part in the organ. of p. which broke down before the present war. All these 4 doms have worked for p & for democratic purposes & all without hesitation sprang into the war when we declared it though they knew how weak we were. We had no means of compelling them & no rt. to give them any summons but they came freely in a matter in which they could only be partially consulted. We could never agree to any system which excluded them from the position they have held & justified for over ¼ of a century. It is for this very reason that I could not listen to the proposal of the Sov Govt without a feeling of profound sympathy. My heart goes out to mighty Russia, bleeding from her wounds & conquering & beating down the tyrant in her path. I should feel that a nation so great with 180,000,000 people would perhaps have cause to look at our Brit org with a questioning eye if they had but one vote when their nos. far exceed our own, speaking of whites. I was very glad that the Pres made an answer which could in no way be considered a final neg. to the consideration of this proposal. I must not however exceed my own personal auth. We have only just heard this new proposal & I should like to discuss it with the For Sec & possibly send a tel. to the Brit. War Cab. We only want to see done what is rt & fair. ∴ I will ask the Mar. to excuse me if I do not give precise final answer on behalf of HMG here today. I will not lose time.

Pres My motion was a little different It did not call for a dec. today. Refer the study to For Mins & second where it should be held & who should be invited.

Church Very glad – we are putting great deal on them – very large & simple Re meeting suggested by Pres I shouldn’t think it desirable hold it so early as March. In Mar. we shall be at the very height of the battle on both the fronts, more millions of soldiers will be engaged than ever before. Our dom. problems in Eng are very complicated with shortage of labor, housing & need of supplying fighting forces at the front. We also have a Par which is in active life from day to day & claims large share of the atten. of the Mins. incl. For Sec.

We are now already a quarter thru Feb I wonder also whether state of the world & Eur. particularly is such as not to make a meeting diff. of all the Un Ns If they are charged with the most tremendous tasks of the future will they have behind them the full thought of their people. Will they have anything left over after vital needs of the war are met. I wonder what the aspect of the Ass. would wear. Could premiers be present?

Pres: This is not a meeting of the Ass. – only of the organizing conf.

Church But they would be same people How many of the nations there will still be in the bondage of the Gers. We do not know how they will represent their people. Another group will be starving in their frightful misery amid the scenes of war. Holland will be there with her ghastly ruins. Fr. will be there with a loud voice. With all these agonized communities will also be joined a large no. of nations who have not suffered at all in the war. Ns that have not even declared war. I can not think that the meeting of such an ass. would be free from the danger of becoming chaotic. Some ns will be screaming in agony & others will be calmly weighing the problems of the future. I see particular diffs for an early meeting so far as Brit. is concerned

Church Position in Eng though perfectly calm & steady is governed by our own const. We may have a gen. election impending. May have new parliament to carry with us, may have entirely new set of ministers

Will always do our best to comply with the Pres. wishes but I feel it absolutely nec. to put on record the very great diff. which I see, practically And I should be very disappointed if the settlement of the membership of Ass was postponed till new meeting of Un Ns can be held

Pres again propose to refer to For Mins to study membership & date & place of meeting & who should be invited

Stalin agreed

Church I said earlier no objection to it being discussed by For Mins but is not a technical matter but one of large & broad dec. Not at all sure matters will be advanced by the discussion

St. 3 Mins will meet, discuss & report

Agreed

(Intermission)

Church. proposed Iran be remitted to For Mins
→{ (Pres says to ERS he can cable Chiang & get consent re voting immediately }
He would not consult France, merely invite Fr. to the meeting} While waiting for Molotov’s paper on Pol.

Pres. raised q. of int. economics – another reason for early estab. of Un Ns Org – should be some way of getting ns that have no purchasing power to get some – historically Persia well wooded before Turks came – no erosion, water – today poorest place I have ever seen in the world. That is why I hope new Un Ns Org. will concern itself with those countries that have no money with which to get goods While on this subject – parallel one – in Eur. some areas have coal, cheap power & light from water. Why favoritism to those who have coal & water or cheap elec. light rates when others 50 miles away have no water, no light Sov. govts. all the Soviets are all thinking in terms like that. We are thinking in terms like that – TVA

Poland

Mol. In E. Curzon line, 5-8 Kms digression in some regions in favor of Pol.

In W. from Stettin along Oder, then along Neisse

Add some emigres to Pol. Govt

Allies recog. Pol Govt now

Prov. Govt. hold elections soon as possible

Mol, Harr., Clark-Kerr to consider & report enlarging Pol. Govt President’s proposals

Can’t reach Poles by phone in time to come here

Pres. We are making real progress

Wants ERS study this tonight.

Knows one word he doesn’t like – “emigre”

Not nec. take emigres Like to have S. D. study it until tomorrow Church Agrees with Pres re “emigre”

Re Neisse – we have always qualified movement of Pol. frontier to W that they shouldn’t take much more than they wish or can take care of. Great pity to stuff Pol. goose so full of Ger. food that he died of indigestion. Large school of opin. shocked by transferring many millions of people by force. I am not. Referred to success of Gk-Turk transfers after last war – but only ½ million

If take E. Pr. Silesia up to Oder means 6,000,000 Gers. That might be managed with modern facilities

St. Says there are no more Gers there. Where our troops come in they find no Gers.

Church We have killed 5 or 6 mil. prob. another million before the end. There ought to be room in Ger. for people transferred They will be needed to fill vacancies So not afraid of prob. of transferring pop. so long as proportioned.

100

Draft of Letter from President Roosevelt to Marshal Stalin

February 7, 1945, noon
DRAFT

My Dear Marshal Stalin, I have been giving a great deal of thought to our meeting this afternoon, and I want to tell you in all frankness what is on my mind.

In so far as the Polish Government is concerned, I am greatly disturbed that the three great powers do not have a meeting of minds about the political setup in Poland. It seems to me that it puts all of us in a bad light throughout the world to have you recognizing one government while we and the British are recognizing another in London. I am sure this state of affairs should not continue and that if it does it can only lead our people to think there is a breach between us, which is not the case. I am determined that there shall be no breach between ourselves and the Soviet Union. Surely there is a way to reconcile our differences.

I was very much impressed with some of the things you said today, particularly your determinations that your rear must be safeguarded as your army moves into Berlin. You cannot, and we must not, tolerate any temporary government which will give your armed forces any trouble of this sort. I want you to know that I am fully mindful of this.

You must believe me when I tell you that our people at home look with a critical eye on what they consider a disagreement between us at this vital stage of the war. They, in effect, say that if we cannot get a meeting of minds now when our armies are converging on the common enemy, how can we get an understanding on even more vital things in the future.

You said today that you would be prepared to support any suggestions for the solution of this problem which offered a fair chance of success, and you also mentioned the possibility of bringing some members of the Lublin government here.

Realizing that we all have the same anxiety in getting this matter settled, I would like to develop your proposal a little and suggest that we invite here to Yalta at once Mr. Bierut and Mr. Osobka Morawski from the Lublin government and also any two of the following list of Poles, which according to our information would be desirable as representatives of the other elements of the Polish people in the development of a new temporary government which all three of us could recognize and support: Bishop Sapieha of Cracow, Vincente Witos, Mr. Zurlowski [Zulawski], Professor Buyak [Bujak], and Professor Kutzeba [Kutrzeba]. If, as a result of the presence of these Polish leaders here, we could jointly agree with them on a provisional government in Poland, the United States Government, and I am sure the British Government as well, would then be prepared to disassociate themselves from the London government and transfer their recognition to the new provisional government.

I hope I do not have to assure you that the United States will never lend its support in any way to any provisional government in Poland that would be inimical to your interests.

It goes without saying that any interim government which could be formed as a result of our conference with the Poles here would be pledged to the holding of free elections in Poland at the earliest possible date. I know this is completely consistent with your desire to see a new free and democratic Poland emerge from the welter of this war.

101

President Roosevelt to Marshal Stalin

Yalta, February 6, 1945
Top secret

My Dear Marshal Stalin: I have been giving a great deal of thought to our meeting this afternoon, and I want to tell you in all frankness what is on my mind.

In so far as the Polish Government is concerned, I am greatly disturbed that the three great powers do not have a meeting of minds about the political setup in Poland. It seems to me that it puts all of us in a bad light throughout the world to have you recognizing one government while we and the British are recognizing another in London. I am sure this state of affairs should not continue and that if it does it can only lead our people to think there is a breach between us, which is not the case. I am determined that there shall be no breach between ourselves and the Soviet Union. Surely there is a way to reconcile our differences.

I was very much impressed with some of the things you said today, particularly your determination that your rear must be safeguarded as your army moves into Berlin. You cannot, and we must not, tolerate any temporary government which will give your armed forces any trouble of this sort. I want you to know that I am fully mindful of this.

You must believe me when I tell you that our people at home look with a critical eye on what they consider a disagreement between us at this vital stage of the war. They, in effect, say that if we cannot get a meeting of minds now when our armies are converging on the common enemy, how can we get an understanding on even more vital things in the future.

I have had to make it clear to you that we cannot recognize the Lublin Government as now composed, and the world would regard it as a lamentable outcome of our work here if we parted with an open and obvious divergence between us on this issue.

You said today that you would be prepared to support any suggestions for the solution of this problem which offered a fair chance of success, and you also mentioned the possibility of bringing some members of the Lublin government here.

Realizing that we all have the same anxiety in getting this matter settled, I would like to develop your proposal a little and suggest that we invite here to Yalta at once Mr. Bierut and Mr. Osobka-Morawski from the Lublin government and also two or three from the following list of Poles, which according to our information would be desirable as representatives of the other elements of the Polish people in the development of a new temporary government which all three of us could recognize and support: Bishop Sapieha of Cracow, Vincente Witos, Mr. Zurlowski, Professor Buyak, and Professor Kutzeba. If, as a result of the presence of these Polish leaders here, we could jointly agree with them on a provisional government in Poland which should no doubt include some Polish leaders from abroad such as Mr. Mikolajczyk, Mr. Grabski and Mr. Romer, the United States Government, and I feel sure the British Government as well, would then be prepared to examine with you conditions in which they would dissociate themselves from the London government and transfer their recognition to the new provisional government.

I hope I do not have to assure you that the United States will never lend its support in any way to any provisional government in Poland that would be inimical to your interests.

It goes without saying that any interim government which could be formed as a result of our conference with the Poles here would be pledged to the holding of free elections in Poland at the earliest possible date. I know this is completely consistent with your desire to see a new free and democratic Poland emerge from the welter of this war.

Most sincerely yours,
FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT

102

The President’s Special Assistant to the President

Yalta, February 7, 1945

Mr. President I think you should try to get this referred to Foreign ministers before there is trouble.

HARRY

103

The President’s Special Assistant to the President, and Reply by the President

Yalta, February 7, 1945

All of the below refers to Churchill’s opposition to early calling of conference of United Nations.

There is something behind this talk that we do not know of its basis.

Perhaps we better to wait till later tonight what is on his mind.

All this is rot! local politics

I am quite sure now he is thinking about the next election in Britain.

104

The Secretary of State to the Ambassador in the United Kingdom

Top secret
ARGONAUT 51

Top secret and personal for Ambassador Winant from Secretary Stettinius.

In view of certain discussions here, please take no repeat no action with regard to our position on French participation in German affairs until further instructions.

War Department please furnish copy of above message to Acting Secretary of State Grew, Washington, for his information and notify him above relates to sentence fourth from end of his number 21 to Secretary Stettinius.

ARGONAUT, February 7, 1945
105

The Pittsburgh Press (February 7, 1945)

Roosevelt likely to skip London

LONDON, England (UP) – Visits by President Roosevelt to London and Paris following the “Big Three” conference appeared unlikely today.

Well-informed sources said Mr. Roosevelt had declined an invitation from King George and Queen Elizabeth to be a guest with Mrs. Roosevelt at Buckingham Palace.

The President was understood to have pleaded that the pressure of business awaiting him in Washington would not permit him to visit London at this time.

High French and Allied diplomatic sources in Paris believed there was also no basis for reports that the President would visit the French capital.

With the French smarting at being left out of the “Big Three” talks, this would be the worst possible psychological moment for the President to visit Paris, informants said.

106

U.S. State Department (February 7, 1945)

Agreed Text of Preliminary Yalta Press Release

Yalta, February 7, 1945

Crimean Conference Press Release

Statement for the press and radio released at 4:30 o’clock p.m., Eastern War Time Wednesday, February 7, 1945.

The President of the United States of America, the Premier of the Soviet Union and the Prime Minister of Great Britain, accompanied by their chiefs of staff, the three foreign secretaries and other advisors, are now meeting in the Black Sea area.

Their purpose is to concert plans for completing the defeat of the common enemy and for building, with their Allies, firm foundations for a lasting peace. Meetings are proceeding continuously.

The conference began with military discussions. The present situation on all the European fronts has been reviewed and the fullest information interchanged. There is complete agreement for joint military operations in the final phase of the war against Nazi Germany. The military staffs of the three Governments are now engaged in working out jointly the detailed plans.

Discussions of problems involved in establishing a secure peace have also begun. These discussions will cover joint plans for the occupation and control of Germany, the political and economic problems of liberated Europe and proposals for the earliest possible establishment of a permanent international organization to maintain Peace.

A communiqué will be issued at the conclusion of the Conference.

Approved by Marshal Stalin, the Prime Minister and President Roosevelt. Released simultaneously in Washington, London and Moscow.

107

Log of the Trip

Wednesday, February 7, 1945

1300: Lunch at Livadia. – The President, Mrs. Boettiger, Mr. Flynn and General Watson.

1610: The Fourth Formal Meeting of the Crimea Conference was convened at Livadia. Present were:

For the U.S. For Great Britain For the USSR
The President. The Prime Minister. Marshal Stalin.
Mr. Stettinius. Mr. Eden. Mr. Molotov.
Admiral Leahy. Mr. Cadogan. Mr. Vyshinski.
Mr. Hopkins. Mr. Clark Kerr. Mr. Maisky.
Justice Byrnes. Mr. Jebb. Mr. Gousev.
Mr. Harriman. Mr. Bridges. Mr. Gromyko.
Mr. Matthews. Mr. Wilson. Mr. Pavlov.
Mr. Hiss. Mr. Dixon.
Mr. Bohlen. Major Birse.

This meeting adjourned at 2000.

2030: Dinner at Livadia. – The President, Mrs. Boettiger, Mr. Harriman, Miss Harriman, Justice Byrnes, Admiral Leahy and Mr. Stettinius.

108

U.S. State Department (February 8, 1945)

Meeting of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 10:00 a.m.

Livadia Palace, USSR

Present
Fleet Admiral Leahy Rear Admiral Olsen
General of the Army Marshall Brigadier General Roberts
Fleet Admiral King Brigadier General Loutzenheiser
Major General Kuter Brigadier General Cabell
Lieutenant General Somervell Brigadier General Lindsay
Vice Admiral Cooke Brigadier General Bessell
Major General Bull Brigadier General Everest
Major General Deane Commodore Burrough
Major General Anderson Colonel Peck
Major General Hull Colonel Lincoln
Major General Wood Colonel Dean
Major General Hill Colonel Bogart
Rear Admiral Smith Colonel Cary
Rear Admiral McCormick Captain Stroop
Rear Admiral Carter Captain McDill
Rear Admiral Duncan Commander Clark
Secretariat
Brigadier General McFarland
Captain Graves

JCS Minutes

Leningrad, February 8, 1945, 10 a.m.
Top secret

Levels of Supply of All Petroleum Products in All Theaters

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Overall Review of Cargo and Troop Shipping Position for the Remainder of 1945 (CCS 746/11)

Admiral Leahy said that although the paper was an agreed report by the Combined Military Transportation Committee and the Combined Shipping Adjustment Board it appeared to him that the essence of the report was an agreement to reexamine the position when a need for further study arose.

General Somervell said that the necessity for a revision had already arisen, particularly with reference to redeployment plans. On the other hand, he felt that the paper in its present form was entirely satisfactory. Referring to paragraph 4b (1) (d) of the paper he said that during the Committee negotiations the British had insisted upon the submission of the report referred to therein on 1 June.

General Marshall said that if the war ended by 1 April 1945 the combined redeployment plan and the related combined report by the Combined Military Transportation Committee and shipping authorities would be too late if submitted on 30 April 1945, as required in the paper.

General Somervell felt that the date for the submission of the report might well be moved up to 1 April.

Admiral King pointed out that the reports could be submitted at any time prior to 30 April. The requirement as stated in the paper was that they should be ready not later than 30 April.

Colonel Lincoln said that as far as the U.S. side was concerned the Planners already had a redeployment paper under way and that they could make this plan available by 1 April.

Admiral Leahy said that a change of the date to 1 April might not be acceptable to the British.

Admiral Smith said that the British members of the combined committees appeared to have no objection to a 1 April date. The date of 30 April had been selected to afford the U.S. Planners ample time to produce their redeployment plan.

General Somervell thought there might be some objection on the part of the British to moving the date up to 1 April. He understood that the British plans for redeployment had not progressed as far as the U.S. plans.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff: Agreed to recommend approval of CCS 746/11 subject to the change of the date in the third line on Page 4 from 30 April to 1 April.

Employment of War-Weary U.S. Bombers Against Large Industrial Target Areas in Germany (JCS 1150/1)

Admiral Leahy said that in this paper the representative of the Commanding General, Army Air Forces, proposed that the question of the employment of war-weary bombers be reopened by recommending that the President address a memorandum on the subject to the Prime Minister. He understood the Prime Minister had instructed the British Chiefs of Staff to withdraw their previous concurrence in the employment of this type of weapon and felt that to request the President to ask the Prime Minister to reverse his stand would be undesirable.

General Anderson explained that there was no intention of launching uncontrolled aircraft indiscriminately against the German countryside. He believed that there had been a misunderstanding on the part of the British as to the employment of this weapon. Recent developments had proved that explosive-laden aircraft could be directed against military targets with considerable accuracy and therefore had a definite military value when used against heavily protected underground installations.

General Marshall said that as he understood it, the British Chiefs of Staff have no military objection to the project but that certain Cabinet Members had opposed it. He doubted the propriety of having the President press the Prime Minister to urge these Cabinet Members to reverse their position, for heretofore these same Members had supported the British Chiefs of Staff in war measures advocated by the U.S.

In reply to a question by Admiral King as to why this project should not be restricted entirely to France, General Anderson said that while the launchings were to be made in France all of the developments so far had taken place in base installations set up in England and to move these base installations to France would be a waste of effort.

General Kuter pointed out that further development of this project was highly important in view of the prospects of a very profitable employment of this type of weapon against Japanese targets.

Admiral Leahy said the discussion had given him an entirely different conception of the weapon. When this matter first came up, he understood that the aircraft would be launched in the general direction of Germany and that the explosive-laden planes would fall aimlessly when the fuel was exhausted. This he considered an inhuman and barbarous type of warfare with which the United States should not be associated; but now, since it appeared that the missiles could be controlled with a considerable degree of accuracy, he agreed that they could be usefully employed. He inquired why, since the planes employed were American and would be operated under American command, it was necessary to collaborate with the British in their use.

General Kuter said that, in view of the instructions already received on this subject by the British Chiefs of Staff and since the matter had heretofore been dealt with on a combined basis, it would be undesirable for the United States now to employ this weapon unilaterally. Moreover, the bases where the project was being developed were located in England.

Admiral Duncan felt that it would be entirely proper for the United States Chiefs of Staff to withdraw their original proposal to use uncontrolled missiles and present the project as a development of a controlled missile.

General Kuter said that the development of the control of this type of aircraft had progressed very rapidly, and it was essential that this development continue.

In view of the foregoing, Admiral Leahy said that he felt an approach should be made to the British Chiefs of Staff for reconsideration at the next meeting of the Combined Chiefs of Staff.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff: Agreed to bring up for discussion at the meeting of the Combined Chiefs of Staff to follow, the question of the employment of radio-controlled explosive-laden bombers.

Subjects for First U.S.-USSR Staff Meeting (JCS 1227/4 and 1227/5)

Admiral Leahy said that in JCS 1227/4 the Joint Staff Planners suggest certain subjects which the United States Chiefs of Staff should discuss with the Soviet General Staff. In JCS 1227/5 General Deane recommends a series of questions as the basis of the discussions. The Planners’ paper appears to go into considerable detail and to contain items not covered in the questions suggested by General Deane.

Admiral Leahy said that he entertained little hope of engaging in extended conversations with the Soviet General Staff.

General Marshall observed that our success in arranging a meeting with the Soviet Army Staff was a good omen as to the Soviets’ willingness to discuss the matters in which we are interested.

Admiral King said that he favored the approach to the Soviets advanced by the Planners.

General Deane said that he found no fault with the Planners’ paper except that he would not recommend that the status of the MILEPOST project be discussed by the United States Chiefs of Staff unless the Soviets first brought up the matter. Moreover, he proposed that the United States Chiefs of Staff refrain from suggesting a Russian strategic air force, inasmuch as it appeared that the aircraft necessary to constitute such a force could not be provided.

General Deane felt that it would be a mistake to bring up the matter of the exchange of weather information in view of the satisfactory progress that had been made so far. The Soviets had met every United States request for the exchange of this information.

General Kuter said that the weather information received so far did not meet the full requirements of the Twentieth Air Force in dealing with Japanese targets and suggested that there should be an increase in the number of weather stations in Siberia.

Admiral Olsen said that the Soviets had encountered considerable difficulty in setting up weather stations in Siberia because of the lack of transportation and communication facilities. They prefer to use their own personnel and equipment and therefore, if it were suggested that more stations be installed, the request should indicate willingness to make U.S. equipment available. He confirmed General Deane’s view that it would be a mistake to insist on a further exchange of weather information on a high level, since negotiations to meet United States requirements could be satisfactorily handled by the United States Mission in Moscow.

General Deane said he had arranged his list of questions with a view to permitting the Soviets to do the talking. The questions were designed to draw out Soviet views. Whether or not the questions were proper ones is a matter for decision by the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

In reply to an inquiry by Admiral Leahy, General Deane said that the operations referred to in Question 7 in JCS 1227/5 were those to be initially undertaken by the Soviets if they entered the war against Japan. General Deane felt that the Soviet answer to the first question in his paper would undoubtedly lead to several contributory questions which would cover the points made by the Planners in their paper.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff: Agreed to use both JCS 1227/4 and 1227/5 in their conference with the Soviet General Staff.

109

Meeting of the Foreign Ministers, noon

Vorontsov Villa, USSR

Present
United States United Kingdom Soviet Union
Secretary Stettinius Foreign Secretary Eden Foreign Commissar Molotov
Mr. Matthews Sir Alexander Cadogan Mr. Vyshinsky
Mr. Hiss Sir Archibald Clark Kerr Mr. Gusev
Mr. Page Mr. Jebb Mr. Gromyko
Major Theakstone Mr. Pavlov
Mr. Golunsky

Page Minutes

Alupka, February 8, 1945, noon
Top secret

Subjects:

  1. WORLD SECURITY ORGANIZATION
  2. YUGOSLAVIAN FRONTIERS
  3. CONTROL COMMISSION IN BULGARIA AND HUNGARY
  4. REPARATIONS
  5. IRAN

World Security Organization

Mr. Eden, who presided, stated that the Foreign Secretaries had been requested to consider two points vis-à-vis the World Security Organization; first, the question of membership which included that concerning the admission of two or three of the Soviet Republics, and, second, the question of the time and place of the meeting.

Mr. Stettinius interjected that there was also the question of exactly which nations should be invited to the initial conference.

Mr. Eden inquired whether anyone desired to initiate the discussion on this general question.

Mr. Stettinius stated that he wished to start at the bottom. He said that he would be delighted to invite the great Allies to confer in the United States. He hoped that the President had not shocked the Foreign Secretaries yesterday by mentioning the month of March as the time for the opening of the conference, and he continued that he felt sure that the time could be arranged to fit in with the convenience of Mr. Molotov and Mr. Eden. However, he was anxious to open the conference at the earliest possible date. Personally, he hoped that it could be held no later than the latter part of April. With respect to the question concerning who would be invited, he recalled that at Dumbarton Oaks there had been considerable talk of inviting the Associated Nations as well as the United Nations. He stated that he had come to the conclusion that it would probably be most satisfactory to limit the invitations to those who had signed the United Nations Declaration and declared war on the common enemy. With respect to Mr. Molotov’s references to multiple membership for the Soviet Union, it was his feeling, from the standpoint of geographical area and population, that this question should be given sympathetic consideration at the opening conference. He continued that he had thus far been unable in his own mind to decide just how inclusion of these entities could be arranged. In the Dumbarton Oaks proposals there was a provision to the effect that each sovereign state had one vote. He had not thus far been able to see clearly how the Dumbarton Oaks proposals could be amended to provide for multiple participation. He concluded that he wished again to refer the matter to the President who had said that the subject was most interesting and deserved sympathetic consideration.

Mr. Molotov stated that he had expressed his views on the inclusion of two or three Soviet Republics in the World Organization at the last plenary meeting. He requested Mr. Eden to state his ideas on the other subjects on the World Security agenda.

Mr. Eden stated that he would be glad to accept the invitation of the United States Government to hold the conference in the United States. He only wished to enter one caveat. He remarked that Mr. Winant, Mr. Gusev, and himself were getting a little jealous in never having any large conferences in London. If Mr. Molotov and he were to go to the United States for this conference, he hoped that there would be an early meeting of the Foreign Secretaries in London.

Mr. Stettinius and Mr. Molotov supported Mr. Eden’s views with respect to a meeting of the Foreign Secretaries in London.

Mr. Eden continued that since some time would be needed to get the Chinese and possibly the French in line, and since the lawyers would need possibly two weeks before the conference opened, he would prefer to postpone the opening of the conference until the second half of April. He pointed out that he would be committed to debates in Parliament before he would be able to go to the United States. After some discussion it was agreed by Mr. Molotov and Mr. Eden that the conference should open on April 25.

Mr. Molotov had previously accepted the invitation to hold the conference in the United States.

Mr. Eden stated that he wished to make a few observations on the inclusion of Soviet Republics in the Organization. He said that he was sympathetically inclined to the Soviet position in this respect and would be ready to say so at whatever was considered to be an appropriate moment.

Mr. Molotov interjected “The sooner the better.” Mr. Molotov then pointed out, in relation to the remarks made by Mr. Stettinius, that the President had indicated yesterday that according to the Dumbarton Oaks proposals each Government had one vote. However, Canada and Australia had individual votes and the fact that they were component parts of the British Empire did not prevent them from being individual members of the assembly. He said that amendments had been made to the Soviet constitution which gave the Soviet Republics the right to have contact with foreign states. The Soviet Union was a union of states. The constitution had now been revised to increase the rights of the Republics. The development of relations between the Republics and foreign states, which had already begun, was in this direction and was developing according to democratic principles. He continued that he believed that it would be superfluous to mention the political, economic and military importance of the Ukraine, White Russia and the Lithuanian Republic. He urged that it would be most desirable if agreement could be reached on this question today.

Mr. Molotov then referred to Mr. Stettinius’ statement that only those nations which had signed the United Nations Declaration and declared war on Germany should be invited to the conference. This immediately gave rise to some questions. Which Polish Government, for example, should be invited.

Mr. Eden immediately interjected that this was a good reason for settling the Polish problem now.

Mr. Molotov continued that certain countries which did not maintain diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union would also be invited. He stated that he would like to check the exact list of states which would attend the conference.

Mr. Stettinius gave Mr. Molotov such a list and pointed out that although Ecuador had recently declared war on Germany it was not included on the list since it had not yet signed the United Nations Declaration.

Mr. Molotov pointed out that if agreement could not be reached on the membership of the organization it should be reported accordingly.

Mr. Eden stated that only the question of the membership of the two Soviet Republics remained open.

Mr. Cadogan pointed out that if a conference were called to complete the work of Dumbarton Oaks and to reach final agreement on a charter, he did not see how any of the original members of the organization could be excluded from the conference.

Mr. Stettinius stated that the United Nations should meet to complete the charter. New members could be elected at this meeting. He said that he was trying to find a way to arrange for consideration of the Soviet request before the first meeting of the assembly.

Mr. Eden suggested as a possible procedure that the United Nations might meet and might draw up an order of the day which would include the question of extending foundation membership to two Soviet Republics. He said that he was quite ready to agree to this proposal.

Mr. Molotov suggested an amendment to Mr. Eden’s proposal to the effect that the three Foreign Secretaries had agreed that it would be advisable to grant admission to the assembly to two or three Soviet Republics.

Mr. Stettinius stated that he was favorably impressed with what Mr. Eden had said. He had not had an opportunity to discuss this matter with the President this morning and it was, therefore, impossible for him to make any firm commitment. However, he would be glad to discuss the question with the President promptly and hoped and expected that the United States would be able to give a favorable reply before the end of the day. He stated that he would not bring up the question of Poland since he hoped that agreement would be reached on this matter at the present conference.

Mr. Stettinius stated that there were a number of other details with respect to Dumbarton Oaks, such as the status of France, how China would be consulted, who would issue the invitations, etc.

Mr. Eden suggested that a sub-committee be set up to study these details and report back to the Foreign Secretaries. Messrs. Jebb, Gromyko and Hiss were appointed to study these matters.

Yugoslavian Frontiers

Mr. Eden stated that although he did not wish to raise the question of Yugoslavian frontiers with Austria and Italy, he would like to point out that with the occupation of Austria by the Red Army there might well be administrative questions relative to the frontiers which should be handled. For this reason, the British Delegation was submitting a note to the Soviet Delegation on the question.

Control Commission in Bulgaria and Hungary

Mr. Eden stated that he also wished to discuss the question of a Control Commission in Bulgaria in the light of the decisions reached vis-à-vis the Hungarian Control Commission. It was agreed to confine the present meeting to those matters which had been referred to the Foreign Secretaries by the Chiefs of State for consideration.

Reparations

Mr. Molotov inquired as to when the American and British Delegations would be prepared to discuss the question of reparations.

Mr. Stettinius stated that he would be ready tomorrow.

Mr. Eden added that he hoped that the British side would also be ready.

Iran

Mr. Eden recalled the signing of the Declaration on Iran. He stated that the Allies had signed treaties with Iran in which certain privileges had been granted to them for the duration of the war. In all other respects, however, he felt that the Iranian Government should be the master in its own house and free to make its own decisions. The British Government felt that it was most important to observe this principle – otherwise the Allies might find themselves in competition in Iranian affairs. No one desired that. For this reason, he urged that the Allies refrain from interfering in internal Iranian matters. With respect to oil, Mr. Eden stated that the British Government did not dispute the Soviet need for Iranian oil and that it was no part of British policy to prevent the Soviet Union from obtaining oil from Northern Iran. Indeed, the Soviet Union was a natural market for this oil. The British Government did not wish to put any obstacles in the way of the Soviet Union’s obtaining oil concessions if and when the Iranians were prepared to negotiate. He continued that he felt that it should be made known publicly that the Allies would not press the matter concerning oil concessions any further until their troops had been withdrawn from Iran. The British Government was ready to consider at the Crimean Conference the advisability of making some statement which would indicate that the Allies were prepared to start to withdraw their troops earlier than was provided for in the Declaration on Iran. This withdrawal might commence as soon as the supply routes were closed. He believed that if agreement could be reached on this point it would have a good effect on world opinion and would show that the Allies were prepared to carry out the Tehran Declaration.

Mr. Molotov maintained that there were two different questions involved, i.e. those concerning the oil concessions and the withdrawal of Allied troops. With respect to the withdrawal of the troops, this question had never been placed before the Soviet Government until today. He maintained that this was a question of fulfilling the provisions of the treaty signed by Iran. If there were any need to amend this agreement the question should be studied. This would take some time.

With respect to the oil concessions, Mr. Molotov stated that he would like to make a few comments. The Soviet Government had asked Ambassador Ahi what the Iranian attitude would be to a request for concessions. Ahi’s reply had been most favorable. Kavtaradze had then proceeded to Iran to negotiate. In his first conversation with Foreign Minister Saed, the Foreign Minister had taken a favorable position. This was only natural since the granting of concessions was not only to the interests of the Soviet Union, but also to Iran. It was also in compliance with the Declaration of Tehran, since the granting of concessions would assist Iranian economy. This was the first stage of the controversy.

During the second stage the situation changed. The Iranians then stated that it would not be appropriate to carry on the negotiations. Thereupon, the Medjlis had adopted a decision to the effect that there should be no concessions during the war. Subsequently, many Iranians had stated that this decision had been adopted in too great a hurry and that it was unwise.

Why could there not be a third stage? Since the Iranians had changed their minds in one direction the Soviets saw no reason why they should not change it back to the first stage. The Soviet Government had endeavored to persuade them to do so. Kavtaradze had returned and the strong-armed methods he had used have subsided. He said that no negotiations were being carried on at the present time and that he did not believe it advisable to pay any special attention to this question now. He suggested that the matter be left alone – that it take its own course. The situation was not acute at the present time.

Mr. Stettinius pointed out that the United States had no wartime treaty with the Iranian Government. American firms had carried on negotiations for oil concessions but these had been dropped following the Medjlis decision. The firms were consequently in the same position as the Soviets. With respect to the withdrawal of troops from Iran he wished to point out that the American troops there were serving the interests of the Soviet Union in moving Lend-Lease supplies from the Persian Gulf. The United States Government was content to leave the question of oil negotiations until the end of the war. He wished fully to support Mr. Eden’s proposals regarding the withdrawal of the Allied troops.

Mr. Eden remarked that the British Government had no opposition to the granting of oil concessions to the Soviet Government.

Mr. Stettinius stated that the United States Government took the same position.

Mr. Eden pointed out that the British had also carried on negotiations with the Iranians, even before the Soviet negotiations had started. As a result of the present attitude of the Iranian Government all of these negotiations were now held in abeyance. He said that if some statement were released, as suggested by him, it might reassure the Iranians and facilitate the recommencement of oil negotiations. With respect to the renewal [withdrawal] of Allied troops, there was no need to amend the Iranian treaty which stated that Allied troops would be withdrawn not later than six months after the termination of hostilities. He felt that it would be wise to withdraw these troops as soon as the supply route was no longer necessary.

Mr. Molotov stated that he believed it might be advisable to limit the matter to an exchange of views on the subject. He offered to summon Kavtaradze to the conference to make a report on the Iranian situation.

Mr. Eden stated that he would like to think over what Mr. Molotov had said and added that he might have new suggestions to make at a forthcoming meeting.

110

Matthews Notes

Alupka, February 8, 1945, noon
  1. Austria-Yugoslav. Must agree on boundary for purpose of admin. Note.
  2. Bulgarian & Hungary Control: Com:
  3. Reparations tomorrow
  4. Iran. –

Oil – no dispute on Sov. to get oil from N. Persia. No obstacle on Rus. concession if & when Pers. are prepared to negotiate. We should all make it known we will not press matters further until Allied Troops withdrawn. We prepared to issue statement prepared to withdraw troops earlier pari passu – when supply route closes. Would show world prepared to carry out Teh decl.

Mol: Eden has 2 pts – different 1. Oil 2. Troops. Troops question new. If necessary to change agreement must be studied & some time needed.

Oil – What was beginning? Negot began by asking Pers. govt attitude on concess N Persia. Answer was attitude would be most favorable Dep. Com Kav went to Iran. Conversation with first position of Said & Shah both favorable. Seemed not only USSR but Persia also inter. Would be econ. assistance to Pers.

Something has changed. No time for details but Govt. said would not continue discussions Persia during war. Mejlis would not discuss. Said decision was taken in a hurry. Why not now a third phase. Why can’t Pers. govt change position again. Trying to persuade them thats all. Kav. has returned home & method which might seem strong has changed. No negot. now but reserve right to take. Why special attention now? Why not let things go their way. Situation not acute.

S. We have no treaty with Our oil concessions also advanced stage & were in same position. Supports Eden on troop withdrawal. Willing to wait till war’s end on concess.

Eden: Reiterates no oppos. to Soviet concession. Does believe some statement might reassure Pers who were frightened at one time and make negotiations easier.

On troop withdrawal no change in treaty necessary. Would help reassure Pers & therefore negot.

Mol: Thinks we should limit ourselves to an exchange of views Might bring in Kavtaradze – he is here in Crimea.