Malta & Crimea Conferences (ARGONAUT)

161

Sixth 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. Hopkins Sir Alexander Cadogan Mr. Vyshmsky
Mr. Byrnes Sir Edward Bridges Mr. Maisky
Mr. Harriman Mr. Jebb Mr. Gusev
Mr. Matthews Mr. Wilson Mr. Gromyko
Mr. Hiss Mr. Dixon Mr. Pavlov
Mr. Bohlen Major Birse

Bohlen Minutes

Leningrad, February 9, 1945, 4 p.m.
Top secret

The President said he understood the Foreign Ministers had another report to make, and he would ask Mr. Stettinius, who presided today, to give it.

Mr. Stettinius then reported on the results of the discussion concerning the Polish question as follows:

The Foreign Ministers discussed at length the Polish Governmental question on the basis of a memorandum submitted by the American Delegation. This memorandum, in accordance with Mr. Molotov’s proposal, agreed to drop the question of the creation of a Presidential Committee.

With respect to reaching a formula on the question of the Polish Government, Mr. Molotov stated that he wished to present to Marshal Stalin certain new considerations advanced in the American memorandum before making a final statement. It was decided to continue discussion of this question at a later date and to report that the three Foreign Ministers thus far had not reached an agreement on the matter.

It was decided, at Mr. Churchill’s request, that the Polish question would be discussed before Mr. Stettinius proceeded with the balance of his report.

Mr. Molotov said that the Soviet Delegation accepted as a basis of discussion the proposal put forward this morning at the meeting by Mr. Stettinius. He said the Soviet Delegation was very anxious to come to an agreement and he believed that this could be done with certain amendments to Mr. Stettinius’ proposal. First, he offered an amendment which dealt with the first sentence of the formula. He suggested that in place of the sentence in Mr. Stettinius’ draft that the following be substituted:

The present Provisional Government of Poland should be reorganized on a wider democratic basis with the inclusion of democratic leaders from Poland itself and from those living abroad, and in this connection this government would be called the National Provisional Government of Poland.

He added that the next two sentences remained unchanged, but he had a slight amendment to the last sentence, namely that the words “non-Fascist and anti-Fascist” be added before the words “democratic parties.” He then said that he felt the last sentence dealing with the responsibilities of the Ambassadors of the three Governments in Warsaw to observe and report on the carrying out of the free elections should be eliminated since he felt certain this would be offensive to the Poles and would needlessly complicate the discussions. He said that it was the first duty of Ambassadors anyway to observe and report, and therefore no such statement is necessary. He concluded that with these slight amendments Mr. Stettinius’ proposal made this morning was acceptable.

Mr. Molotov said he had one more request, and that was that the Subasic-Tito agreement in regard to Yugoslavia would be put into effect. He said that the Prime Minister, in messages to Marshal Stalin, had urged this, that there had been a series of delays, and he felt that agreement should be reached here. He felt that agreement should be reached here at this conference to put this agreement immediately into effect irrespective of the wishes of the King.

The Prime Minister replied he thought that the Yugoslavia question was virtually settled and would take no time, but he thought it better to proceed immediately to discuss the Polish question. He said he was glad to see that an advance had been made at the meeting of the Foreign Ministers and to hear Mr. Molotov’s proposal on the urgent, immediate and painful problem of Poland. He said he wished to make some general suggestions that he hoped would not affect the movements the President had in mind. He said that here, in a general atmosphere of agreement, we should not put our feet in the stirrups and ride off. He said that he felt it would be a great mistake to hurry this question – it is better to take a few days of latitude than to endanger bringing the ship into port. He said it was a great mistake to take hurried decisions on these grave matters. He felt he must study the Polish proposals before giving any opinion.

The President then proposed that Mr. Stettinius should finish his report on the meeting of Foreign Ministers this morning and then the conference would adjourn for half an hour in order to study Mr. Molotov’s amendments to the Polish proposals.

Marshal Stalin and the Prime Minister agreed.

The Prime Minister repeated that he felt that this great prize should not be imperilled by too much haste, and he definitely did not want to leave this conference without an agreement on the subject, which he felt to be the most important we had before us.

Mr. Stettinius then read the following report of the meeting of Foreign Ministers on the results of their discussions on reparations:

The American Delegation submitted a draft proposal on the basic principles of exacting reparations from Germany for study and recommendation by the Moscow Reparations Commission.

Agreement was reached on the first two points relative to which countries should receive reparations, and to the types of reparations in kind Germany should pay.

The Soviet and American Delegations reached agreement on the wording of the third (final) point to the effect that the Reparations Commission should consider in its initial studies as a basis for discussion the suggestion of the Soviet Government, that the total sum of the reparations in accordance with the points (a) and (b) of the preceding paragraph, should be twenty billion dollars and that 50% of it should go to the Soviet Union.

Mr. Eden reserved his position to await instructions from his Government.

The Soviet Delegation stated that reparations payments would be based upon 1938 prices, having possibly in mind increases of 10 to 15% on the prices of the items delivered.

Mr. Stettinius then reported on the results of the discussion at the meeting of Foreign Ministers on the matter of providing machinery in the World Organization for dealing with territorial trusteeships and dependent areas, as follows:

It was agreed that the five Governments which will have permanent seats on the Security Council should consult each other prior to the United Nations Conference [on] providing machinery in the World Charter for dealing with territorial trusteeship and dependent areas.

The Prime Minister interrupted with great vigor to say that he did not agree with one single word of this report on trusteeships. He said that he had not been consulted nor had he heard of this subject up to now. He said that under no circumstances would he ever consent to forty or fifty nations thrusting interfering fingers into the life’s existence of the British Empire. As long as he was Minister, he would never yield one scrap of their heritage. He continued in this vein for some minutes.

Mr. Stettinius explained that this reference to the creation of machinery was not intended to refer to the British Empire, but that it had in mind particularly dependent areas which would be taken out of enemy control, for example, the Japanese islands in the Pacific. He said that it was felt that provision had to be made for machinery to handle this question of trusteeship for dependent areas taken from the enemy and he repeated that this was not intended to refer to the British Empire.

The Prime Minister accepted Mr. Stettinius’ explanation but remarked it would be better to say it did not refer to the British Empire. He added that Great Britain did not desire any territorial aggrandizement but had no objection if the question of trusteeship was to be considered in relation to enemy territory. He asked how Marshal Stalin would feel if the suggestion was made that the Crimea should be internationalized for use as a summer resort.

Marshal Stalin said he would be glad to give the Crimea as a place to be used for meetings of the three powers.

Mr. Stettinius then completed reading the report of the meeting of Foreign Ministers, as follows:

Trusteeships (continued)

It was also agreed that this subject should be discussed at the United Nations Conference itself.

The Sub-Committee appointed yesterday is continuing its work and will report to the Foreign Ministers today. This report will include matters pertaining to the form of the invitation to the forthcoming Conference. This subject was discussed at today’s meeting, and there appears to be an identity of views thereon.

Iran

Sufficient time had not elapsed to permit the Soviet Delegation to give proper study to a paper submitted by Mr. Eden on this question. The subject was consequently not discussed.

Yugoslavia

On the proposal of the Chairman, it was agreed that representatives of Mr. Eden and Mr. Molotov should be appointed to draw up a statement on the Yugoslav situation.

There was also agreement that before the termination of the Crimean Conference it would be desirable that agreement should be reached on the execution of the Subasic-Tito agreement.

The Prime Minister then asked if the Soviet Government had agreed to the two amendments proposed by Mr. Eden in regard to the Subasic-Tito agreement.

Mr. Molotov replied that it was a question of putting the agreement speedily into effect and that amendments meant more delays. He said that it would be better to ask Tito and Subasic concerning the amendments after the agreement had gone into effect.

The Prime Minister inquired whether it was too much to ask that legislative acts of the temporary authorities be subject to confirmation by democratic processes.

Marshal Stalin said that delays were very undesirable and that if the British proposed two more amendments the Soviet Government might propose some of their own. In the meantime, the government of Yugoslavia was held in the balance.

The Prime Minister said you couldn’t say this, as Tito was a dictator and could do what he wants.

Marshal Stalin replied that Tito is not a dictator but the head of a national committee without any clear government, and this is not a good situation.

Mr. Eden replied that it was not a question of amendments before the agreement went into force but merely that this conference request that they be adopted. He said that Subasic was going to ask for it anyway and as Tito would agree everything would be all right.

Marshal Stalin said the first of the British amendments provided that any former members of the Skupshtina who had not collaborated with the Germans should be included in the anti-Fascist Vetch, and the second suggested that all legislative acts of the anti-Fascist Vetch should be confirmed by a regularly elected body. He said that he agreed with these amendments and found them good, but first he would like the government to be formed and then propose the amendments to it.

Mr. Eden remarked that he felt if we could agree here on the amendments then we could ask Tito after the agreement was in force to adopt them.

Marshal Stalin agreed to this proposal. He added that he thought it would be a good idea to send a telegram stating the desires of the three powers to have the agreement put into effect irrespective of the King’s wishes.

The Prime Minister and Mr. Eden explained that the question of the King had been settled and anyway wasn’t important, and Subasic was on his way to Yugoslavia, unless weather had prevented him, to put the agreement into effect. The Prime Minister added that he thought we should here agree to advise the adoption of the amendments.

Marshal Stalin said that he had already agreed, and as a man of his word he would not go back on it.

There was then a half-hour intermission for the study of the Polish proposals.

The President said that after studying Mr. Molotov’s amendment we were now very near agreement and it was only a matter of drafting. He said that for those governments which still recognized the London government the use of the words “Provisional Government” was somewhat difficult, and he felt that the first words of Mr. Molotov’s amendment might read “The Government now operating in Poland.” He said he felt it was very important for him in the United States that there be some gesture made for the six million Poles there indicating that the United States was in some way involved with the question of freedom of elections, and he therefore felt that the last sentence concerning the reports of the Ambassadors was important. He repeated that he felt, however, that it was only a matter of words and details and the three Foreign Ministers might meet tonight to discuss it.

The Prime Minister said he agreed with the President that progress had been made, but he felt that the draft might be tied up by the Foreign Ministers this afternoon. He said that he had two points now that he wished to emphasize. He felt it was desirable to mention in the beginning the new situation that had been created as a result of the liberation of Poland by the Red Army which called for a government more broadly based. He said this might be an ornament but nevertheless an important ornament. He said the second question was more important and related to the last sentence of the United States draft. He said he would make an appeal to Marshal Stalin in that one of the great difficulties in the Polish situation was the lack of accurate information, and we were thus called on to make a decision of great responsibility on the basis of inadequate information. He said that we know that there are bitter feelings among the Poles and fierce language had been used by Osobka-Morawski in regard to the London government, and that he understood the Lublin government had declared its intention to try as traitors the members of the Polish Home Army and the underground forces. He said these reports caused great anxiety and perplexity in England, and he hoped these two points would be considered with Marshal Stalin’s usual patience and kindness.

The Prime Minister continued that he personally would welcome observers of the three powers in any area where they appeared needed. He therefore felt that the last sentence of the United States draft in regard to responsibilities of the Ambassadors was very important. He said that he understood that Tito would have no objection to foreign observers when elections were to be held in Yugoslavia, and the British would welcome observers from the United States and the Soviet Union when elections were held in Greece, and the same would apply to Italy. He said these were not idle requests, since, for example, he knew in Egypt that whatever government held the elections won. He recalled that King Farouk for this reason refused to permit Nahas Pasha to hold an election while the latter was prime minister.

Marshal Stalin remarked that he understood the Egyptian elections where he had heard that the very greatest politicians spent their time buying each other, but this could not be compared with Poland since there was a high degree of literacy in Poland. He inquired as to the literacy in Egypt, and neither the Prime Minister or Mr. Eden had this information at hand.

The Prime Minister remarked that he did not mean to compare Poland with Egypt, but he had to give the House of Commons real assurance that free elections would be held. For instance, would Mikolajczyk be allowed to take part in these elections?

Marshal Stalin remarked that Mikolajczyk was a member of the Peasant Party which wasn’t a Fascist party and therefore he could take part in the elections.

The Prime Minister suggested this question be considered by the Foreign Ministers tonight.

Marshal Stalin remarked that he thought this was a matter which should be discussed in the presence of the Poles.

The Prime Minister said he thought this was a matter which was necessary to carry through and that it was important to assure the House of Commons that free elections would be held in Poland, 


Marshal Stalin, in reply to this observation, said they were good people and in olden times many of them were scientists. He mentioned Copernicus in this connection. He admitted that they were still quarrelsome and there were still some Fascist elements in Poland, and that was why “non-Fascist, etc.” had been added to the term “democratic parties.”

The President said he would like to add one word. He felt that the elections was the crux of the whole matter, and since it was true, as Marshal Stalin had said, that the Poles were quarrelsome people not only at home but also abroad, he would like to have some assurance for the six million Poles in the United States that these elections would be freely held, and he said he was sure if such assurance were present that elections would be held by the Poles there would be no doubt as to the sincerity of the agreement reached here.

Marshal Stalin then said he had before him the Declaration on Liberated Europe, and Mr. Molotov had one small change to propose. He said that in the fourth paragraph, after the part about consulting the other United Nations, he suggested adding the following:

In this connection, support will be given to the political leaders of those countries who have taken an active part in the struggle against the German invaders.

Marshal Stalin remarked that with this slight amendment he found the Declaration acceptable.

The President pointed out that the Declaration would of course apply to any areas or countries where needed as well as to Poland.

The Prime Minister said he did not dissent from the President’s proposed Declaration as long as it was clearly understood that the reference to the Atlantic Charter did not apply to the British Empire. He said he had already made plain in the House of Commons that as far as the British Empire was concerned the principles already applied. He said he had given Mr. Willkie a copy of his statement on this subject.

The President inquired if that was what had killed Mr. Willkie.

The President said that in earlier drafts France had been included but was now absent.

Marshal Stalin remarked that three powers were better than four.

The Prime Minister said it might be possible to ask France to associate itself with the Declaration.

The President suggested that this matter be considered by the three Foreign Ministers tonight.

Marshal Stalin said that the Prime Minister need have no anxiety that Mr. Molotov’s amendment was designed to apply to Greece.

The Prime Minister said he was not anxious about Greece – that he merely desired that everybody should have a fair chance and do his duty.

Marshal Stalin said he thought it would have been very dangerous if he had allowed other forces than his own to go into Greece.

The Prime Minister said he would welcome a Soviet observer in Greece.

Marshal Stalin said he had complete confidence in British policy in Greece.

The Prime Minister expressed gratification in this statement.

The Prime Minister then said that they should touch on, at this conference, the question of war criminals – that is, those whose crimes had no geographical limitation.

Mr. Molotov inquired whether his amendment to the Declaration was acceptable.

The President replied that he thought it should be considered by the Foreign Ministers.

Marshal Stalin said that we could then consider it agreed that the Tito-Subasic agreement should go into effect immediately.

The Prime Minister concurred.

Marshal Stalin made some reference to sending a telegram to Tito but the suggestion was not pursued.

The Prime Minister said that he personally had drafted the Declaration on German atrocities issued by the Moscow Conference which dealt with the subject of the main criminals whose crimes had no geographical location. He said it was an egg that he had laid himself and he thought a list of the major criminals of this category should be drawn up here. He said he thought they should be shot once their identity is established.

Marshal Stalin asked about Hess.

The Prime Minister said he thought that events would catch up with Hess. He said he believed these men should be given a judicial trial.

Marshal Stalin replied in the affirmative. He then asked if the war criminal question applied to prisoners of war.

The Prime Minister replied that it did if they had violated the laws of war. He said that we should merely have an exchange of views here and no publicity should be given to the matter.

Marshal Stalin inquired if the offensive on the Western Front had begun.

The Prime Minister said yes – about 100,000 British launched an attack yesterday morning and made an advance of about 3,000 yards over a five-mile front. He said the defense had been weak except in two villages, and were now in contact with the defenses of the Siegfried Line. He said the second wave, of the United States 9th Army, was to start tomorrow. He added that this offensive was to continue and grow in intensity.

The meeting then adjourned until four o’clock tomorrow.

162

Tripartite meeting on the draft agreement regarding liberated prisoners of war and civilians, 4:30 p.m.

Vorontsov Villa, USSR

Present
United States United Kingdom Soviet Union
General Deane Admiral Archer Mr. Novikov Assistant
Mr. Page

Memorandum of Conversation

Alupka, February 9, 1945, 4:30 p.m.
Top secret

Subject: EXAMINATION OF THE DRAFT RELATING TO PRISONERS OF WAR AND CIVILIANS LIBERATED BY THE SOVIET AND ALLIED ARMIES

Preamble

No comment.

Article I

No comment.

Article II paragraph 1

Mr. Novikov requested that the words “undertake to follow all” be replaced by the words “at the same time take the necessary steps to implement.”

Article II, paragraph 3

Mr. Novikov requested that the words “notifying the competent Soviet or Allied authorities” be replaced by “effected as a rule by agreement or in any case only after notification to the competent Soviet or Allied authorities.”

Article III

Mr. Novikov said that he would prefer the text of Article III of the Soviet draft. This reads as follows:

  1. The competent British and Soviet authorities will supply liberated Soviet citizens and British subjects with food, clothing, housing and medical attention both in camps or points of concentration and en route, and with transport until they are handed over to the authorities at the other side at places agreed upon between the sides on the following basis:

    (a) Ex-prisoners of war shall be provided with all forms of supply (stores and food) on a basis laid down respectively for privates, non-commissioned officers and officers.

    (b) Civilians will be supplied on a basis laid down for privates.

The parties will not mutually demand compensation for these or other services which their authorities may respectively supply to liberated Soviet citizens or British subjects.

It will be noticed that the Soviet draft makes no mention of UNRRA or other relief agencies and makes special provision of supplies to civilians.

In endeavoring to find a compromise the British suggested a draft omitting the first three lines of Article III (up to the parenthetical statement) and revise the last sentence of the first paragraph to read as follows:

The standards of such food, clothing, housing and medical attention shall make distinction between military rank but shall apply to liberated civilians and liberated members of the respective forces.

The Soviets explained that the reference to UNRRA was superfluous since there was nothing in the agreement which would bar UNRRA or any other relief agency from operating. They said they would refer the British re-draft to their Government.

Article IV

The Soviets requested the insertion of the words “in agreement with the other party” twice after the words “liberty to use.”

Article V

The British wish to add the words “except for the cases of payment of Lira in Italy which shall be subject to future discussions” at the end of the second paragraph.

The Russians stated that they thought this insertion should read “except for the cases of payment of Lira,, and, in Italy, Rumania, and Bulgaria which shall be the subject of future discussions.”

Article VI

The British pointed out that they had added a new sentence which had not as yet been approved by the Joint Chiefs of Staff. This sentence which comes at the end of the article, reads as follows: “Any liberated member of the respective forces who is unwilling to perform such will be exercised under similar supervision.”

Article VII

No comment.

Article VIII

No comment.

In addition to the above comments, it was considered advisable to include an additional article reading to the effect that “the agreement enters into force upon signature.”

The British representative also stated that his Government desired to exchange notes with the Soviet Government concerning nationals of other countries, (Belgium, Holland, Poland), in British uniform who were liberated by the Russian armies.

The question also came up as to whether a tri-lateral or two bilateral agreements should be signed. The Russians indicated that they were prepared to sign either document.

It was suggested that a further meeting be called tomorrow at 3:30 p.m. and that endeavors be made to have the documents signed by Mr. Molotov, Mr. Eden and Mr. Stettinius no later than Sunday.

[Attachment]

Revised British Wording, Feb. 9.

Article 6

X [Ex-] Prisoners of War (with the exception of officers) and civilians of each of the contracting parties may, until their repatriation, be employed in the management, maintenance and administration of the camps or billets in which they are situated. They may also be employed on a voluntary basis on other work in the vicinity of their camps in furtherance of the common war effort in accordance with agreement to be reached between the competent Soviet and

{United States/British authorities. The question of payment and conditions of labour shall be determined by agreement between these authorities. It is understood that liberated members of the respective forces will be employed in accordance with military standards and procedure and under the supervision of their officers. Any liberated member of the respective forces who is unwilling to perform such work will be exercised under similar supervision.

163

The Pittsburgh Press (February 9, 1945)

Background of news –
What they have done

By Bertram Benedict

This is the eighth great conference among the Allies. The enumeration includes the Moscow Conference, although it was of the foreign ministers, not of the heads of states. The enumeration excludes various joint conferences – such as those between President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill in Washington, between Mr. Churchill and Marshal Stalin in Moscow – which seem to have been held chiefly to implement old decisions rather than to reach new decisions of wide import.

The previous seven great joint conferences have been:

  • August 1941, on the Atlantic, between Mr. Roosevelt and Mr. Churchill. It produced the eight principles of the Atlantic Charter. The United States was not yet a belligerent, although aiding Britain.

  • January 1943, at Casablanca, between Mr. Roosevelt and Mr. Churchill, who conferred also with Generals de Gaulle and Giraud.

  • August 1943, at Quebec, between Mr. Roosevelt and Mr. Churchill.

  • October-November 1943, at Moscow, among the foreign ministers.

  • November 1943, at Cairo, among Mr. Roosevelt, Mr. Churchill and Chiang Kai-shek.

  • November-December 1943, at Tehran, among Mr. Roosevelt, Mr. Churchill and Marshal Stalin.

  • September 1944, at Quebec, between Mr. Roosevelt and Mr. Churchill.

From three of these seven conferences – the one at Casablanca and the two at Quebec – the official statements said little except that military decisions had been agreed upon.

The important principles

The far-reaching principles produced by the other four great inter-Allied conferences so far can be thus summarized:

  • Unconditional surrender of the Axis powers.

  • No territorial or other aggrandizement, no territorial changes against the will of the peoples concerned. rights of all people to choose their own forms of government (Atlantic Charter).

  • Restoration to China of all Chinese territory seized by Japan in the past, freedom of Korea, expulsion of Japan from other territory seized by Japan, including the mandated Pacific islands (Cairo).

  • International organization, open to all states, to maintain peace (Atlantic Charter, Moscow, Tehran).

  • Equal access, with respect to existing obligations, of all states to the vital raw materials and trade of the world (Atlantic Charter).

  • Collaboration for better labor standards, economic advancement, social security, freedom from fear and want (Atlantic Charter).

  • Freedom of the seas (Atlantic Charter).

  • Disarmament of aggressor states, general reduction im armaments (Atlantic Charter, Moscow).

  • Non-use of military forces within boundaries of other states after the war except for enforcing the peace settlements and preserving peace, law and order and security (Moscow).

  • All measures deemed necessary to prevent violation of the terms imposed on the enemy (Moscow).

  • Freedom and self-government for Italy, suppression of Italian Fascism, full consultation on Italian problems (Moscow).

  • Freedom for Austria and consideration in the Austrian settlement for any Austrian contribution to its own freedom (Moscow).

  • Assistance to Iran during and after the war and maintenance of Iran’s sovereignty and territorial integrity (Tehran).

  • Trial and punishment of German war criminals, military or civilian, at the scene of their crimes, wherever committed and of arrest and transfer “to justice” of Italian Fascist “chiefs and army generals” charged with war crimes (Moscow).

164

U.S. State Department (February 9, 1945)

Meeting of the Foreign Ministers, 10:30 p.m.

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 Mr. Jebb Mr. Gusev
Mr. Bohlen Mr. Roberts Mr. Gromyko
Mr. Allen Mr. Golunsky
165

Log of the Trip

Friday, February 9, 1945

1230: The President attended a plenary meeting of the Combined Chiefs of Staff at Livadia. Present were:

For the U.S. For Great Britain
The President. The Prime Minister.
Admiral Leahy. Field Marshal Brooke.
General Marshall. Air Marshal Portal.
Admiral King. General Ismay.
General Kuter. Admiral Cunningham.
General McFarland. Brigadier Cornwall-Jones.

1330: Lunch at Livadia. – The President, the Prime Minister, Mrs. Boettiger, Mrs. Oliver, Mr. Harriman, Miss Harriman, Admiral Leahy and Justice Byrnes.

1600: The President, the Prime Minister and Marshal Stalin and members of the American, British and Soviet Delegations met in the courtyard of Livadia where they sat for still and motion pictures.

1615: The Sixth Formal Meeting of the Crimea Conference was convened in the grand ballroom of Livadia. Present:

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.

The meeting adjourned at 1950.

1930: Lieutenant (j.g.) W. K. Kloock, USNR, White House courier, arrived at Livadia with mail from Washington. He made the journey from Washington in three days.

2030: Dinner at Livadia. – The President, Mrs. Boettiger, Major General John E. Hull, Major General Kuter, Fleet Admiral Leahy and Vice Admiral C. M. Cooke.

166

Völkischer Beobachter (February 10, 1945)

Wir und die Dreierkonferenz

vb. Wien, 9. Februar – Eine Reihe von Tagen ist schon vergangen, seitdem jene drei MĂ€nner, die fĂŒr diesen Krieg und damit fĂŒr alles Leid, das durch ihn ĂŒber die Menschen gekommen ist, verantwortlich sind, ihre Konferenz im Schwarzen Meer begonnen haben, aber was man bisher davon gehört hat, War spĂ€rlich und ziemlich nichtssagend. Das will nicht heißen, dass wir etwa ungeduldig auf das „Ergebnis“ dieser Besprechungen warten wĂŒrden, im Gegenteil, denn wir halten uns nur an die nackten Tatsachen. In dieser Hinsicht ist aber zweierlei Interessantes festzustellen.

Erstens ist bemerkenswert, dass diese Konferenz an sich scheinbar dringendst notwendig war, denn so leicht ist der schwerbewegliche Mann des Weißen Hauses nicht zu einer so weiten Reise zu veranlassen. Was Churchill betrifft, so sind genug Meldungen bekannt und veröffentlicht worden, die erkennen ließen, wie sehr er sich um das Zustandekommen der Konferenz bemĂŒht hat, wie dienstbeflissen er Stalin sagen ließ, dass er „an jedem Ort und zu jeder Zeit bereit“ stĂŒnde. Das ist ein vielsagendes, ja untrĂŒgliches Zeichen dafĂŒr, dass es England sehr eilig und sehr nötig hat, irgendwie politisch mit erfolgversprechenden Ereignissen aufwarten zu können.

Die ZustĂ€nde in Belgien und Frankreich, vor allem aber in Griechenland sprechen fĂŒr die Welt eine zu deutliche Sprache von dem Tiefstand der politischen Ebene, auf die das englische Weltreich herabgesunken ist, seitdem Churchill das Steuer fĂŒhrt. So dumm und verblendet sind auch die Briten nicht, dass sie das VerhĂ€ngnisvolle dieser Entwicklung nicht begriffen hĂ€tten. Die weihnachtliche „Siegesfeier“ ist eine Churchillsche Illusion geblieben und das ununterbrochene deutsche Vergeltungsfeuer auf London und SĂŒdengland trĂ€gt kaum dazu bei, solchen Illusionen fĂŒr einen absehbaren spĂ€teren Zeitpunkt neuen Auftrieb zu geben. Im Gegenteil, wir wissen aus den Nachrichten, die von der Feindseite selbst verbreitet werden, dass das ehemals so stolze England schon mit sehr viel Wasser kochen muss


Zweitens lĂ€sst sich aus der Tatsache, dass zum „Konferenzort“ die Wasser des Schwarzen Meeres gewĂ€hlt wurden, von jedem Schuljungen die logische Folgerung ableiten, dass hier Stalins Wunsch der Befehl war, dem Roosevelt und Churchill Folge leisten mussten. Der Massenansturm der Bolschewisten gegen den deutschen Osten hat. Stalins bisher schon bestandenes politisches Übergewicht ĂŒber seine beiden Komplicen derart verstĂ€rkt, dass sie einfach nur mehr BefehlsempfĂ€nger geworden sind. Was aber die Bolschewisten mit ihren Panzerarmeen erreichen wollen, nĂ€mlich die Niederringung des deutschen Widerstandes und die Brechung der deutschen Kampfkraft und Kampfmoral, das wollen Roosevelt und Churchill mit dem alten Betrug von 1918 Wilsonscher PrĂ€gung erreichen und so das Ihrige zum erhofften „Siege“ beitragen, um damit bei der Teilung der Beute noch halbwegs gut abzuschneiden.

Das deutsche Volk aber ist gewarnt, ja geradezu immun gegen das Gift scheinheiliger Versprechungen. Wir wissen, was uns blĂŒhen wĂŒrde, wenn wir schwach wĂŒrden, wenn wir die Waffen aus der Hand legten, ehe nicht Leben und Freiheit uns in unserem Sinne gesichert sind. Wir sahen, und sehen an dem Beispiel der Wehrlosen, die im Westen dem amerikanischen „Eroberer“ und im Osten den Bolschewisten in die HĂ€nde fielen, was das Schicksal ist, das sie uns im Falle ihres Sieges zu bereiten gedenken. Was sie uns angekĂŒndigt hatten, haben sie in beiden FĂ€llen voll und ganz wahr gemacht. Wenn sie jetzt in lockenden Tönen vom „Weltfrieden“ reden wollten, kann uns das keinen Eindruck mehr machen, denn wir hatten uns, wie gesagt, nur an die nackten Tatsachen. Und die sind von vornherein der klarste Beweis fĂŒr die lĂŒgenhaften VerkĂŒndungen, die man auf den Wellen des Schwarzen Meeres zusammenbraute. Schon in Teheran gedachte man sich mit einer „Botschaft“ an das deutsche Volk zu wenden und hat dann doch in letzter Minute davon Abstand genommen, weil die Sache zu aussichtslos erschien.

Noch leben ja zu viele Zeugen der Folgen des Novembers 1918. Die Deutschen in den Donau- und Alpengauen haben sich die Erinnerung an die Auswirkungen des Vertrages von St. Germain gut bewahrt. Sie war wohl etwas verblasst in den Jahren des harten tĂ€glichen Lebenskampfes, die nachher kamen und von den meisten als eine Art Naturnotwendigkeit hingenommen wurden. Als aber das Großdeutsche Reich geschmiedet war, da ist uns allen erst so richtig aufgegangen, was es heißt, Angehörige und Mitbestimmende eines großen Volksstaates zu sein, eines Staates, der wahrhaft fĂŒr das Volk selbst und nicht fĂŒr das Alleinwohl von GeldsĂ€cken oder Gottesgnadenmenschen geschaffen ist.

Viel zu kurz nur war die Zeit, die gerade diesen Gauen gegönnt, war, um den neuen Aufschwung voll zu leben; denn das Komplott der Feinde war schon geschmiedet, die Schlinge, die das Reich erwĂŒrgen sollte, von den Juden in der ganzen Welt schon geknĂŒpft. Aber gerade weil wir wissen, wie die wahre Freiheit eines tĂŒchtigen und arbeitsamen Volkes beschaffen ist, was sie dem einzelnen bietet und gibt, gerade darum gewinnen wir auch aus uns selbst die Kraft, jedem feindlichen Ansturm zu widerstehen, in ZĂ€higkeit und Beharrlichkeit auszuhalten, bis wir unsere Freiheit wiedergewonnen haben, ungeachtet der Opfer, die der Kampf uns noch auf erlogen macht.

Darum wird auch jener neue Feldzug unserer Feinde, der jetzt von dieser Dreierkonferenz ausgeht, weder mit den militĂ€rischen noch mit den agitatorischen Waffen zu dem vom Feind erstrebten Ziele fĂŒhren, weil es lediglich an uns liegt, ihn abzuwehren mit jener unwiderstehlichen Kraft und StĂ€rke, die in der deutschen Einheit und Einigkeit liegt. Ganz abgesehen von jenen militĂ€rischen Mitteln, die fĂŒr uns noch im Schoss der nĂ€chsten Zukunft liegen


A. E. T.

167

Sowjetblatt bestÀtigt VernichtungsplÀne

Stockholm, 9. Februar – Die sowjetische Iswestija nimmt in einem Kommentar zu der Dreierkonferenz Stellung und legt dabei eine Offenherzigkeit an den Tag, die alle Zweifel aus der Welt schafft.

Die Iswestija fasst in einem Satz das Endziel der bolschewistischen Politik gegenĂŒber Deutschland zusammen und legt mit brutaler Ehrlichkeit den Plan vor, den der Kreml zu verwirklichen erstrebt, falls es gelĂ€nge, Deutschland in die Knie zu zwingen.

„In der Endphase des Krieges wird die Todesstrafe, die von der gesamten freiheitsliebenden Menschheit ĂŒber Deutschland verhĂ€ngt wurde, durchgefĂŒhrt werden,“ so schreibt Iswestija.

An diesem Satz gibt es kein Deuteln: Moskaus Ziel ist die Ausrottung des deutschen Volkes, das wird hier noch einmal klar und unmissverstĂ€ndlich von dem fĂŒhrenden bolschewistischen Blatt bestĂ€tigt.

Es ist kennzeichnend, dass das englische Reuters-BĂŒro von dem Iswestija-Kommentar gerade diesen einen Satz in die Welt verbreitet. Das bedeutet, dass England das bolschewistische Kriegsziel gutheißt und mit allen Mitteln unterstĂŒtzt. Diese Erkenntnis ist fĂŒr uns Deutsche nicht neu, aber jede BestĂ€tigung gibt uns immer wieder die Gewissheit, dass wir mit einer geschlossenen Feindfront zu rechnen haben, wenn es sich darum handelt, Deutschland zu vernichten, das deutsche Volk zu dezimieren und seine MĂ€nner als Arbeitssklaven zu deportieren.

Unsere Antwort auf diesen Knechtungs- und Ausrottungsplan haben wir dem Gegner tausendmal ins Gesicht geschleudert. Was auch immer Stalin und seine plutokratischen Komplicen Roosevelt und Churchill bei ihrem Dreiertreffen aushandeln mögen oder mochten, es wird nichts an den FeindplĂ€nen Ă€ndern und wir werden dem nur noch eine fanatischere Entschlossenheit entgegenstellen. Dass wir um unser Leben kĂ€mpfen, ist uns gerade in den letzten Wochen, wo die bolschewistische Flut gegen das Deutsche Reich anbrandet, klarer denn je geworden, dass wir aber diesen Kampf bis zur letzten Entscheidung durchstehen, darĂŒber dĂŒrfte es im Feindlager keinen Zweifel geben.

168

U.S. State Department (February 10, 1945)

Meeting of the Foreign Ministers, noon

Vorontsov Villa, USSR

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

Page Minutes

Alupka, February 10, 1945, noon
Top secret

Subjects:

  1. THE POLISH FORMULA
  2. DECLARATION ON LIBERATED EUROPE
  3. YUGOSLAVIA
  4. REPARATIONS
  5. COMMUNIQUÉ ON THE CRIMEAN CONFERENCE
  6. WORLD ORGANIZATION
  7. AUSTRO-YUGOSLAV FRONTIER
  8. YUGOSLAV-ITALIAN FRONTIER
  9. YUGOSLAV-BULGARIAN RELATIONS
  10. IRAN

Mr. Eden, who presided, opened the meeting.

The Polish Formula

Mr. Stettinius stated that the American experts as well as the President had given serious study to the Polish formula and that the American Delegation was prepared to withdraw the last sentence, which Mr. Molotov had objected to, on the understanding that the President would be free to make any statement he felt necessary on Poland relative to his receiving information from his Ambassador on the question.

Later in the conversation Mr. Eden stated that he did not wish to indicate during the conversation on the Polish formula that he agreed with the American proposal to drop this last sentence.

Mr. Stettinius stated that he, of course, preferred the document as it existed. The President, however, was so anxious to reach agreement that he was willing to make this concession.

Mr. Molotov stated that he had several amendments to the formula. He proposed that “as soon as practicable” be changed to “as soon as possible.” He also proposed that the last part of the last paragraph be drafted to read: “the Governments of the United States of America and Great Britain will establish diplomatic relations with the Polish Government as has been done by the Soviet Union.”

Mr. Stettinius stated that he could not agree with this second change.

Mr. Molotov pointed out that a special situation existed in Poland. The Soviet Government had accorded the Polish Government recognition, whereas, the United States and Great Britain had not.

Mr. Eden said that the Government referred to in the formula was a new government and that it was most necessary that the three Allies move together in recognizing it.

Mr. Stettinius supported Mr. Eden and added that it was vital for public opinion in the United States to adhere to the principle of a new Polish Government.

Mr. Molotov stated that the present situation was a different one and that the document would reflect this difference. He referred to the inadvisability of prejudicing the present situation or raising difficulties in the rear of the Red Army. He suggested that the matter be given consideration and be subsequently discussed. Mr. Molotov later suggested that Mr. Eden make a full report on last night’s and today’s discussion on the Polish situation for submission to the plenary session.

Declaration on Liberated Europe

Mr. Stettinius stated that he had consulted with his experts and with the President on the Declaration on Liberated Areas and that he was obliged to say that the American Government found it impossible to accept the amendment proposed by Mr. Molotov at the Plenary Session of February 9. To do so would cause untold difficulties in United States domestic affairs. The text of this Declaration, with Mr. Molotov’s amendment is attached hereto.

Mr. Molotov stated that he wished to submit a second amendment. He suggested that in the fifth paragraph the words “they will immediately establish appropriate machinery for the carrying out of the joint responsibilities set forth in this declaration,” be replaced by the words “they will immediately take measures for the carrying out of mutual consultation.”

Mr. Stettinius and Mr. Eden agreed to this formula.

Mr. Stettinius inquired as to the status of Mr. Molotov’s amendment of February 9.

Mr. Molotov agreed that it should be dropped, though he remarked that he thought it very useful in that it might prevent recurrences similar to those in Greece.

Mr. Eden inquired whether the British proposals regarding French association were acceptable.

Mr. Molotov replied that he had not had sufficient time to give full consideration to this proposal. He suggested that it be discussed at the four o’clock meeting.

Mr. Stettinius observed that he approved highly the British proposal and recommended that it be included in the Declaration.

Yugoslavia

Mr. Eden stated that he had been informed that Subasic was due to leave today or tomorrow for Belgrade. The principal question under dispute, as he understood it, has been about the names of the Regents. However, in the British view, there was no reason why this should hold up the execution of the agreement. If Mr. Molotov so desired, Mr. Eden stated that Marshal Stalin’s proposal might be accepted to the effect that a telegram be sent setting forth the views of the Foreign Ministers on the Yugoslav situation.

Mr. Molotov inquired whether any mention should be made of Yugoslavia in the Crimea Conference Communiqué.

Mr. Eden suggested that both courses might be advisable.

Mr. Molotov recalled that Marshal Stalin had suggested that a telegram be sent to Tito and Subasic suggesting that they expedite the coming into force of the agreement.

Mr. Eden stated that he would submit such a draft telegram to the Foreign Ministers for consideration.

Reparations

Mr. Eden stated that he wished to reserve the position of the British Government with respect to pre-war debts and claims. He was in favor of setting up the Reparations Commission as soon as possible.

Mr. Maisky interjected that unless the British agreed to the American draft submitted February 9, the Commission would have no basis, no directives for its work.

Mr. Eden stated that he agreed on the principles involved in the American proposals concerning the immediate withdrawal of property from Germany and the annual contributions. However, he wished to submit a redraft of the proposals.

Mr. Eden stated that reparations should be considered in connection with the dismemberment of Germany. There seemed to be two Russian objectives which were difficult to reconcile – the depletion of German manufacturing capacity and the insuring of German ability to make large payments at a later date. The British were most anxious to avoid conditions in which it would be necessary for them to finance and feed Germany at a later date as a result of reparations. Furthermore, the British would like France on the Moscow Commission from the start. The British Government also felt that the question of labor should be considered by the Moscow Commission and that it would be inadvisable to name any figure for deliveries until the Moscow Commission had started its work. In addition, reparations arrangements should be made without prejudices to the restitution of looted property.

Mr. Molotov agreed to this last statement.

Mr. Maisky stated that Mr. Eden’s reply was very disappointing. Its whole spirit was to take from Germany as little as possible.

Mr. Eden interjected that this was not the case; however, he could say that the Prime Minister did not believe that the Russians would receive anywhere near as much as they hoped for.

Mr. Maisky stated that naturally when the dismemberment of Germany had been decided in a practical form the reparations plan must be adjusted. This problem was considered from its initiation. There was no contradiction. The amount of annual payments were quite possible after the contemplated removals. If Mr. Eden had any doubts the easiest way out was to accept the formula agreed upon by the Americans and Russians yesterday as the basis for discussion and to raise the British proposals in Moscow on this basis. He stated that the question of labor would certainly come up for discussion of the plan during the Commission studies of Germany. He pointed out that the formula did not commit the Allies to the exact figure. Taking into account all considerations advanced by Mr. Eden, Mr. Maisky maintained that the British could easily agree to the formula.

Mr. Eden maintained that the British wished a period shorter than ten years for the reparations payments. They preferred five years.

Mr. Stettinius pointed out that the ten-year period was merely mentioned as a basis for discussion. It might result that all the capital movements could be effected in seven years. He added that the Soviet Government was not committing itself to ten years or twenty billion dollars.

Mr. Eden inquired why this time limit should then be put in the formula.

Mr. Maisky replied that it was desired as a basis for discussion.

Mr. Eden stated that he would submit an alternative draft and that he hoped that the subject might be discussed at the 4:00 o’clock meeting.

Communiqué on the Crimean Conference

Mr. Molotov inquired whether any thought had been given to the communiqué on the Conference.

Mr. Stettinius stated that the American Delegation was drafting something for the consideration of the Foreign Ministers. He suggested that the first item on the afternoon’s agenda be the question of a communiquĂ© and that the drafting of a communiquĂ© be assigned to the Foreign Ministers.

Mr. Molotov and Mr. Eden agreed to this suggestion.

World Organization

Mr. Eden stated that he wished to submit a report of the subcommittee.

Mr. Molotov stated that he agreed to both points contained in the report, i.e., regarding the method of consulting France and China and the text of the invitation to the Conference.

Mr. Eden and Mr. Stettinius also agreed.

Austro-Yugoslav Frontier

Mr. Eden stated that this problem would surely arise and that he did not wish a repetition of “Athens.” He wished to submit a small paper on the question.

Mr. Molotov stated that he would wish to study this paper before discussing it.

Mr. Stettinius stated that he felt that paragraph (b) on page two went beyond the period of occupation and that it might be improved by redrafting.

Yugoslav-Italian Frontier

Mr. Eden stated that he wished to submit a paper on this question. He added that he did not expect to discuss it at the present meeting. A copy of this document is attached.

Yugoslav-Bulgarian Relations

In accordance with Mr. Eden’s suggestion, Mr. Molotov stated that he wished to make a few remarks on the Bulgarian-Yugoslav treaty of alliance. The British Embassy in Moscow had transmitted to the Narkomindel a note on the Balkan Federation in which it was stressed that such a Federation might include Turkey. This was not an urgent matter at the present time; however there were conversations in progress between Yugoslavia and Bulgaria on a treaty of friendship and alliance. The Soviet Government entertained favorable views on this treaty and had informed the British accordingly. The Bulgarians and Yugoslavs were collaborating militarily against the Germans in Yugoslavia. There should, consequently, be no objections to such a treaty.

Mr. Eden stated that this treaty raised the important question of principle. The British held the view that former enemy states should be debarred from entering into treaty relations with other states when they were under an occupational regime and certainly not without the permission of the Allies. Apart from this principle, the British were somewhat anxious concerning the effect of the treaty on reparations which Greece should obtain from Bulgaria. He wished to submit a separate memorandum on this matter.

Mr. Molotov stated that the Soviet Foreign Office had received a note from the British to the effect that former enemies under an armistice regime should not have treaty relations with other enemy states. But now it was a question of an ex-enemy and a friendly state. He maintained that the British had stated that they had no objections to treaties between ex-enemy and friendly states.

Mr. Eden questioned this.

Mr. Molotov continued that this principle was also implied in the British proposal concerning a Balkan Federation in which former enemy and friendly states would enter.

Mr. Eden maintained that he did not believe that states under an armistice regime should be permitted to make peace treaties without the permission of the Allies. Furthermore, the British never had in mind a Balkan Federation until the armistice period had terminated.

Mr. Stettinius stated that he was completely in accord with Mr. Eden’s views.

Mr. Eden inquired whether it would not be preferable for the states in question to wait.

Mr. Molotov stated that he had no power to speak for them.

Mr. Eden reminded him that Bulgaria had signed an armistice and was not free to do what it wished.

Mr. Stettinius suggested that this question be discussed by the Ambassadors and Mr. Molotov in Moscow promptly.

Mr. Molotov stated that it might be preferable to postpone discussion of this matter until tomorrow and then to seek agreement.

Iran

Mr. Eden inquired whether Mr. Molotov had considered the British document on Iran.

Mr. Molotov stated that he had nothing to add to what he had said several days ago on the subject.

Mr. Eden inquired whether it would not be advisable to issue a communiqué on Iran.

Mr. Molotov stated that this would be inadvisable.

Mr. Stettinius urged that some reference be made that Iranian problems had been discussed and clarified during the Crimean Conference.

Mr. Molotov stated that he opposed this idea.

Mr. Eden suggested that it be stated that the declaration on Iran had been reaffirmed and reexamined during the present meeting.

Mr. Molotov opposed this suggestion.

169

Hiss Notes

Alupka, February 10, 1945, noon

Ed. chmn
2/10
For Mins
12.10 p m

ERS asked make statement

We are prepared to withdraw our insistence on the final sentence in the Polish memo, which Mr. Mol. objected to with the understanding that the Pres would be perfectly free to make any statement to the Am. people he might think he had to relative to receiving inform. from his Amb.

Mol. Would like to make a small amend. to yesterday’s text: one cond: as soon as possible

of U.S. & Gt Brit will est. dip. reis, with it as has been done by the Soviet Un

Ed. Objected – It’s to be a new govt

Mol we can leave out “as has been done by the Soviet Un” Ed. But we would all have to recognize it.

Mol. our sit. is diff. from that of U.S. We have already given recog. to present govt

Ed: Yes but this will be a new gov’t

ERS: Advisable that we all move together

Mol: Present sit. being different the doc. must reflect this diff. We quite agree on the future. Let us think about it.

ERS Decl, on Lib. Areas Have discussed Mr. Mol’s proposal Impossible for us to consider amend. Would create untold diffs. for us with respect to our dom, situation

Mol: Then I will propose another amend:

2nd ¶ from the end “they would immed. take measures for carrying out mutual consultation”

Suggests one or other amend.

Ed: An improvement

ERS I’m very favorably impressed

Mol. As to the former amend. Thinks it would be very useless because we don’t wish shots which have occurred in Athens to take place elsewhere

ERS. Sorry, I’m not authorized to consider this amend. any further.

New amend. agreed to

—>Mol Withdraws his former amend.

Ed: One other point. About Fr. sit. Proposed addition of a last ¶

Mol Hasn’t had time to study it, perhaps at 4.00

ERS As stated yesterday, thinks it most desirable

Ed. Little further inform. Re Yug. Sub. due leave today or tomorrow for Bel. Argument, as I as [sic] understand, has been about names of regents. But in our view no reason this should hold up coming into force of agt. We can send tel. setting forth our views as Mar. St. suggested

Mol. and communique?

Ed Can do that, too

Mol. Tel. telling them to hurry up That the agt. come into force immed.

Ed. Will show other 2 delegs. draft of tel.

Ed. Re Pol. – I didn’t mean to indicate agt. with Am. proposal to drop last sentence

ERS We would of course still prefer doc. as it exists but Pres so anxious reach agt, he is willing to make this concession

Mol. Thanks him Mr. Stett. very much

Reparations
Ed:

  1. 1st reps should be considered in connection with dismemberment

  2. Two R objects – depletion Ger. mfg. capacity & ensuring ability make large payments later – are difficult to reconcile We are very anxious to avoid conditions making it nec. finance or feed Ger later as result reparations

  3. Would like Fr. on Mos. Commission from start

  4. Labor should be considered too

  5. Can’t name any figure for deliveries until Commission has studied matter

Mol: Any points Mr Ed. agrees on?

Ed. Add: These arrangements are without prejudice to restitution of looted property Mol. Of course

Ed. reserve position re pre-war claims We are in favor of Com. being set up in Mos as soon as possible

Mol: No basis for work of Com. We don’t give it any directives or principles on which to work.

Ed. We agree on principles: immediate withdrawal of machinery, etc – quicker the better – & annual payments Has a redraft

Maisky: Mr. Ed’s reply is very disappointing – Whole spirit of reply Spirit apparently is to take from Ger little as poss.

Ed: Never said anything of kind but can say my P.M. doesn’t think you’ll get anything like as much as you think.

Re Ed’s points

  1. Naturally when dismemberment decided in practical form, plan be adjusted

  2. Problem was considered from beginning. No contradiction. Ain’t of annual payments quite possible after contemplated removals. If you have doubts, shortest cut to accept our formula of yesterday – to take our proposals as basis for discussion & then bring up your points Never expected support Ger.

Nothing on 3

  1. Labor certainly will come in in elaboration of whole plan, but as Com. studies q.

  2. Our formula doesn’t commit you to the figures. Taking into account all your points, you can easily agree to formula agreed on by Sov & Am. delegs

Ed. We consider $20 billion equals 500,000,000ÂŁ a yr.

Maisky No in ten yrs

Ed: We wanted a shorter period

Mol. Let us write down 10 yrs

Ed: We prefer 5 yrs

ERS Its all a basis of discussion Might end up all these capital movements possible in 7 yrs Sov. Gov’t isn’t committing itself to 10 yrs or $20 billion

Maisky Certainly. In end might be 5 or 6

Ed Then why put in 10 yrs

Maisky: As basis for discussion

Ed. Let each put in its own plan Will give alternate draft & discuss at 4.00 p m Agreed

Mol. re communique

ERS We are hard at work drafting something for your consid.

Mol: You take initiative?

ERS There will be a draft, we would be glad to take initiative I would suggest 1st order bus. this afternoon that drafting of commun. be assigned to For Mins

Mol. Good

Ed. all right

World Org. report of subcommittee

Mol. I agree to both points – consultation of Ch & Fr. & the invitation

Ed We all agree then

Austria-Yug. frontiers

Ed: presented proposal

Mol. Translate & study

ERS: we feel (b) on p 2 should be pretty carefully considered. We feel that as phrased this goes beyond period of occupation

Ed: That is all that is meant Drafting may need to be made clearer

Yug-It frontier

Ed: proposal to be studied

Yug-Bul. relations

Mol. Mentioned treaty of alliance between Yug & Bul.

  1. Recently For. Commissariat rec’d a note re federation, stressing federation might include Turkey. This is not an urgent q.

  2. There are conversations between Yug & Bul about a treaty of friendship & alliance Sov. Govt holds a favorable view. They are collaborating militarily ag. Gers in Yug. There should be no objections to it.

Ed: Glad to hear treaty is not actual (?) Anxious about effect of this treaty on reparations we are anxious & all agreed Gr. should receive from Bul. Has separate memo on this.

Mol All obligs. of Bul. have been enforced. No one can change them without consent of 3 powers Bul & Rum. cannot have a treaty between them Now is q. of treaty between 1 friendly country & an ex-enemy There was a direct agt by Brit Govt to it. Q by Eden?

Mol. There were objections to treaty between 2 former enemies but not friendly & enemy

Ed. We do not think a country under armistice terms can make a treaty without consent of 3 powers. I never had it in mind a country under armistice would come into a federation until armistice over

ERS I’m completely in accord with Ed’s views

Ed: Can’t they wait?

Mol: Has no power to speak for them.

Ed. Bul. has signed armistice. Isn’t free to do as she wants. Although has threatened to shoot our planes coming here.

Mol. Our planes have been shot at in Yug but was mistake & our troops shot at by Am planes

Ed. I don’t know why Bul. can shoot at any planes Can we ask this wait awhile

Mol Can go on with discussions

ERS Suggest our Ambs discuss with Mol. in Mos. promptly Mol. Would wait until tomorrow

Iran
Mol. Has nothing to add

Ed: Would Mol like to put out communique

Mol: Undesirable. Can discuss this later

ERS I would urge some reference that Iranian problems have been discussed & clarified. Very troublesome q.

Mol Against that

Ed: Say re-examined & reaffirmed Teheran Decl.

Mol Against that

ERS status of Pol. Agreed Ed. to report on yesterday’s & today’s progress.

Reparations:
Mol.: mention in document just 2 figures as basis for discussion

170

U.S. Delegation Memorandum

Yalta, February 10, 1945

Items Still Before the Foreign Ministers

Poland
There is probably no reason to discuss this until the plenary meeting.

Declaration of Liberated Europe
Same status as Number 1.

Iran
The British may propose adoption of their paper – Mr. Matthews has a copy of it.

Reparations
The British have not yet agreed to Soviet-American paper. The British or Russians may want to bring this up.

Mr. Eden Wants
(a) To have the provisions relating to the Hungarian Control Commission apply also in Bulgaria;
(b) To get an agreement for Bulgarian reparations to Greece;
(c) To express opposition to Russian proposal favoring an alliance between Tito and Bulgaria.

U.S. Delegation Memorandum On The Polish Government

Yalta, February 10, 1945

Text of Formula on Poland So Far Agreed by the Three Foreign Ministers

A new situation has been created by the complete liberation of Poland by the Red Army. This calls for the establishment of a provisional Polish government more broadly based than was possible before the recent liberation of western Poland. The provisional government now functioning in Poland should be reorganized on a broader democratic basis with the inclusion of democratic leaders from Poland itself and from those living abroad. This new government will then be called the “Polish Provisional Government of National Unity.” Mr. Molotov, Mr. Harriman, and Sir Archibald Clark Kerr, are authorized to consult in the first instance in Moscow with members of the present provisional government and with other democratic leaders from within Poland and from abroad with a view to the reorganization of the present government along the above lines. This “Polish Provisional Government of National Unity” would be pledged to the holding of free and unfettered elections as soon as possible on the basis of universal suffrage and secret ballot. In these elections all democratic and anti-Nazi parties would have the right to take part and to put forth candidates.

When a “Polish Provisional Government of National Unity” has been properly formed in conformity with the above, the three governments will then accord it recognition.

In lieu of the following sentence: “When a ‘Polish Provisional Government of National Unity’ has been properly formed in conformity with the above, the three governments will then accord it recognition.” Mr. Molotov suggests the following rewording:

When a “Polish Provisional Government of National Unity” has been properly formed in conformity with the above, the Governments of the United States and of Great Britain will establish diplomatic relations with it as has been done by the Soviet Union.

This sentence was not accepted by Mr. Stettinius or Mr. Eden.

He said he would bring it up again at the four o’clock meeting this afternoon.

The British still advocate inclusion of the following sentence:

The ambassadors of the three powers in Warsaw, following such recognition, would be charged with the responsibility of observing and reporting to their respective governments on the carrying out of the pledge in regard to free and unfettered elections.

U.S. Delegation Memorandum on the Soviet Proposal for the Final Paragraph of the Formula on Poland

Yalta, February 10, 1945

Mr. Molotov’s latest draft proposal for the end of the last sentence of the Polish formula:


 the Government of the USSR, which now maintains diplomatic relations with the present Provisional Government of Poland and the Governments of Great Britain and the United States will establish diplomatic relations with the Polish Provisional Government of National Unity. and will exchange Ambas. by whose reports the respect. Govts. will be kept informed about the situation in Poland.

171

British Amendment to the Draft Declaration on Liberated Europe

Yalta, February 10, 1945
Top secret

British Draft of Last Paragraph of Declaration on Liberated Europe

In issuing this Declaration the three Powers express the hope that the Provisional Government of the French Republic may be associated with them in the action and the procedure suggested.

172

British Proposal on Reparations

Yalta, February 10, 1945
Top secret

Basic Principles of Exaction of Reparation from Germany

  1. The proportions in reparation allotted to the claimant countries shall be determined according to their respective contributions to the winning of the war and the degree of the material loss which they have suffered. Account shall be taken of deliveries made to the claimant countries by other enemy countries.

  2. Reparation is to be exacted from Germany in the three following forms:

    (a) Removals within two years from the surrender of Germany or the cessation of organized resistance from the national wealth of Germany located on the territory of Germany herself as well as outside her territory. These removals to be carried out chiefly for purpose of destroying the war potential of Germany. Subject to the fulfilment of these aims Germany’s industrial capacity will not be reduced to a point which would endanger the economic existence of Germany and the execution of such obligations as may be imposed on her.

    (b) Annual deliveries from current production for a period to be considered.

    (c) Use of German labor and lorry service.

  3. In fixing the amount of reparation to be exacted under paragraph two above account shall be taken of any arrangements made for the dismemberment of Germany, the requirements of the occupying forces, and Germany’s need to acquire from time to time sufficient foreign currency from her exports to pay for her current imports and the pre-war claims of the United Nations on Germany.

173

Report to the Foreign Ministers by the Subcommittee on Arrangements for the United Nations Conference

Yalta, February 10, 1945
Top secret

Report to the Foreign Ministers

We were instructed on February 8 to prepare a report to the Foreign Ministers on the following subjects:

  • a) The method of consultation with France and China in regard to the decisions taken at the present conference concerning the proposed world organization.

  • b) The text of the invitation which should be issued to all the nations which will take part in the United Nations Conference.

With regard to (a) we consider that the United States on behalf of the three powers should consult the Government of China and the Provisional French Government.

With regard to (b) we attach for the approval of the Ministers a draft invitation to all the nations which will take part in the conference.

[Attachment]

Invitation

The Government of the United States of America, on behalf of itself and the Governments of the United Kingdom, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, and the Republic of China and of the Provisional Government of the French Republic, invites the Government of __________ to send representatives to a Conference of the United Nations to be held on April 25, 1945, or soon thereafter, at ______ in the United States of America to prepare a Charter for a General International Organization for the maintenance of international peace and security.

The above-named governments suggest that the Conference consider as affording a basis for such a Charter the Proposals for the Establishment of a General International Organization, which were made public last October as a result of the Dumbarton Oaks Conference, and which have now been supplemented by the following provisions for Section C of Chapter VI:

C. Voting

  1. Each member of the Security Council should have one vote.

  2. Decisions of the Security Council on procedural matters should be made by an affirmative vote of seven members.

  3. Decisions of the Security Council on all other matters should be made by an affirmative vote of seven members including the concurring votes of the permanent members; provided that, in decisions under Chapter VIII, Section A and under the second sentence of paragraph 1 of Chapter VIII, Section C, a party to a dispute should abstain from voting.

Further information as to arrangements will be transmitted subsequently.

In the event that the Government of _______ desires in advance of the Conference to present views or comments concerning the proposals, the Government of the United States of America will be pleased to transmit such views and comments to the other participating Governments.

174

British Proposal Regarding the Austrian-Yugoslav Frontier

Yalta, February 10, 1945
Top secret

British Statement on Austro-Yugoslav Frontier

If the British proposals for the allocation of zones of occupation in Austria are approved, the whole length of the Austro-Yugoslav frontier will be a British responsibility. This may involve us in difficulties with Yugoslavia because though the Yugoslav Government have not so far asked for any alteration of the Styrian portion of this frontier they have advanced claims to Klagenfurt and those parts of Carinthia which they failed to obtain under the plebiscite held in 1919. Action may be required to resist Yugoslav efforts to assert these claims and to secure the withdrawal of Yugoslav partisans who in the course of operations may well advance into Carinthia and establish control over it. It would be invidious for HMG to be solely responsible for such action and after our experiences in Greece we must try to prevent British troops from becoming involved in fighting with Allied partisans. We hope, therefore that an agreement might be reached between the three powers for the maintenance of the 1937 Austro-Yugoslav frontier pending the final territorial settlement and for joint measures to ensure its maintenance and observance by Yugoslavia.

It is therefore suggested we should agree at the present conference:

  • (a) that pending the final peace settlement the 1937 frontier between Austria and Yugoslavia shall be restored.

  • (b) that the integrity of this frontier is the joint interest of the three powers, and that the USSR and the USA will support any action which HMG may see fit to take to preserve its integrity.

  • (c) that the three powers should jointly inform the Yugoslav Government of decisions (a) and (b) above and request the Yugoslav Government to give an undertaking to preserve this frontier.

175

British Proposal Regarding Venezia Giulia

Yalta, February 10, 1945
Top secret

Notes for the Secretaries of State in Regard to Venezia Giulia

I should like to draw the attention of my colleagues to the fact that the province of Venezia Giulia in the northeast of Italy is a potential powder magazine. It is therefore likely that there will, as the war draws to a close, be clashes in this area between the Yugoslavs and the Italians, and we must prevent these outbursts to the best of our ability.

We had originally intended to set up Allied Military Government over the whole province up to the 1937 frontier but we now have doubts whether this would be a very satisfactory course for the following reasons. Tito has not yet put his views in writing but he has made it pretty clear that he will not agree to such a proposal. He certainly intends to administer himself the considerable areas which he claims for Yugoslavia and part of which are already controlled by his Partisans. Even if under extreme pressure he was forced to accept Allied (British) Military Government his Partisans would remain in arms throughout the district and it would be a miracle if sooner or later they did not obstruct our Military administration. We should then have to take forceful measures to assert our authority and fighting might begin. Alternatively, there might be clashes between the Yugoslav Partisans and the Italian Partisans, both trying to hold as much territory as they could. In that case also we should have to intervene to keep the peace by force. I would therefore ask my colleagues to agree to establish some body for the purpose of working out a provisional line of demarcation in the Venezia Giulia between the area to be controlled by Tito and the area over which we should establish Allied Military Government. We have made an attempt ourselves to draw up such a line based for the most part of ethnic considerations. But obviously we cannot jointly agree on a line now, all we can do is agree to the principle that there should be such a line and that some body of technicians should be established for the purpose of determining it. After that it would no doubt be for His Majesty’s Government to obtain Tito’s acceptance of it. But if they do this His Majesty’s Government would like to be able to say that both their Allies agree with the proposal.

Finally, I would point out that in any case, even if the area west of my suggested provisional line is allotted to Tito, it will be necessary, in the early stages at any rate, for our Supreme Commander to make use of the communications from Trieste northwards in which case he would have to take suitable measures to that end. It might later be possible for him to arrange for his communications to Austria to pass further to the west.

176

British Proposal Regarding the Allied Control Commission in Bulgaria

Yalta, February 10, 1945
Top secret

Allied (Soviet) Control Commission in Bulgaria

His Majesty’s Government regard it as essential (a) that their representatives in Bulgaria should enjoy reasonable freedom of movement and communication, and (b) that decisions about which they have not been consulted should not be taken in their name. In the case of Hungary, (a) has been satisfactorily dealt with in the “Statutes of the Allied Control Commission in Hungary,” and His Majesty’s Government suggest that identical Statutes should be adopted for the Control Commission in Bulgaria in order to meet the points made in the message from Mr. Eden which was delivered to M. Molotov on or about December 11, 1944.

His Majesty’s Government also consider that during the first period there should be prior consultation with the British and American representatives and that, should the Soviet Government feel obliged to take any unilateral action on military grounds not covered in the Armistice, it should be taken on their sole responsibility and in the name of the Soviet Government only.

During the second period, i.e. after the conclusion of hostilities with Germany, His Majesty’s Government wish to ensure that

  • (a) The British and American representatives should take their places in the Control Commissions as full members and should have the right to attend all their meetings and to participate fully in the consideration of all questions before the Commissions. They should also have the right of direct access to the Bulgarian authorities.

  • (b) Decisions of the Allied Control Commission should be unanimous and its name and authority should be used only where the representatives of all three powers are in agreement. If the Soviet High Command, being in de facto control of Bulgaria through the presence of Soviet troops, insist upon issuing directives to the local Government or taking action which has not been approved by both the British and American representatives they should act unilaterally in their own name.

  • (c) The extent to which the British and Americans will share in the actual executive and administrative work of the Control Commission will be a matter to be settled on the spot. But they must certainly have the right to membership of any subcommittee or executive organ dealing with matters concerning British and American rights and property.

  • (d) The detailed implications of these proposals should be worked out between the Soviet chairman and the British and American representatives on the Control Commission on the spot.

177

British Proposal on Yugoslav-Bulgarian Relations

Yalta, February 10, 1945
Top secret

Yugoslav-Bulgarian Relations

His Majesty’s Government recently communicated to the Soviet Government an expression of their views regarding a possible Yugoslav-Bulgarian federation. In replying to this communication, the Soviet Government informed His Majesty’s Government that they were aware that negotiations between Yugoslavia and Bulgaria for the conclusion of a pact of alliance and mutual assistance were proceeding and added that their attitude towards this was favourable. The Soviet Government, however, considered that the question of a Balkan federation, and in particular of a Yugoslav-Bulgarian federation, was not at present actual and was of no practical importance.

While His Majesty’s Government are glad to learn that the Soviet Government do not consider the question of a Yugoslav-Bulgarian federation to be actual at present and that they regard the matter as of no practical importance, they are disturbed to learn that a pact of alliance and mutual assistance between Yugoslavia and Bulgaria is under negotiation and that the attitude of the Soviet Government towards these negotiations is favourable.

His Majesty’s Government cannot but regard the pact now under negotiation as open to the same objections which they felt in regard to a possible federation. In their view an enemy state whose status is still regulated by an armistice regime must be debarred from entering into special treaty relations with another state, more particularly with another state with which she is still technically in a state of war except with the explicit permission of all the victorious Powers with whom the armistice was concluded.

Quite apart from the important question of principle involved, His Majesty’s Government are also anxious regarding the effect of the pact now under negotiation between Yugoslavia and Bulgaria upon the interests of Greece which has hitherto not received from Bulgaria the full reparation to which she is entitled under the terms of the armistice. This aspect of the matter is treated in greater detail in a separate aide-mĂ©moire.

His Majesty’s Government accordingly consider that a communication should be made to the Bulgarian Government by all the victorious Powers with whom she recently concluded an armistice, stating that they cannot agree to her entering into special treaty relations with Yugoslavia at this stage and that full reparation must be made to Greece before there can be any question of such negotiations being resumed. His Majesty’s Government consider that Marshal Tito should simultaneously be informed of the objections seen by the victorious Powers to the conclusion of a Yugoslav-Bulgarian pact. His Majesty’s Government would be glad to learn the views of the Soviet Government upon this matter as soon as possible.

178

British Proposal Regarding Greek Claims on Bulgaria

Yalta, February 10, 1945
Top secret

Greek Claims Upon Bulgaria, More Particularly in Regard to Reparations

His Majesty’s Government are concerned regarding the position in regard to Greek claims against Bulgaria. On the occasion of the signature of the Armistice with Hungary, the Soviet Government informed the Czechoslovak and Yugoslav Governments that they might send representatives to be accredited to the Hungarian Control Commission for the purpose of dealing with all questions affecting their particular government.

On January 23, the Greek Government, with the support of His Majesty’s Embassy in Moscow, approached the Soviet Government with a request for facilities in Bulgaria similar to those granted to the Czechoslovak and Yugoslav Governments in Hungary. No reply has, however, yet been vouchsafed to this request by the Soviet Government.

The Greek people have suffered very seriously from Bulgarian depredations and are in the view of His Majesty’s Government entitled to early satisfaction and to immediate reparation deliveries of which Greece stands in urgent need. The Greek Government have already presented to the Bulgarian Control Commission a list of commodities necessary to the Greek economy and due to them in virtue of the Bulgarian Armistice Agreement, the delivery of which to Greece in the immediate future is essential to the maintenance of Greek economy. Deliveries which are more urgently required comprise, inter alia, food stuffs, locomotives, agricultural implements and livestock. Furthermore, in view of the decision incorporated in the Hungarian armistice terms allotting to Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia fixed sums payable in commodities as reparations over a period of six years, it is in the view of His Majesty’s Government equitable that similar arrangements should be made to fix a lump sum due to Greece by Bulgaria to be paid similarly in commodities over a period of six years. In the view of His Majesty’s Government a corresponding sum should be allocated to Yugoslavia which has also suffered from Bulgarian occupation. In this connection his Majesty’s Government desire to make it clear that, while they are in general opposed to the fixing of lump sums for reparations to be exacted from enemy countries, they consider it only equitable, in view of the fact that lump sums have been allocated to the Soviet, Czechoslovak and Yugoslav Governments under the Rumanian, Finnish and Hungarian Armistices, that a similar lump sum should now be allocated to Greece and Yugoslavia under the Bulgarian Armistice.

His Majesty’s Government accordingly trust that the Soviet Government will accede to the proposals put to them on January 23 with the support of His Majesty’s Government concerning Greek representation on the Control Commission in Bulgaria. They further trust that the Soviet Government will agree to give explicit instructions to the head of the Control Commission in Bulgaria that immediate deliveries must be made to Greece in accordance with the terms of the armistice and that the list already presented by the Greek Government to the Soviet Government is to be taken as the basis for determining the nature and amounts of commodities to be delivered. Finally, His Majesty’s Government are of the opinion that immediate consideration should be given to the question of fixing the total Bulgarian reparation liability to Greece and Yugoslavia, if necessary in terms of money.

179

British Memorandum on Oil Equipment in Romania

Yalta, February 10, 1945

Oil Equipment in Roumania

His Majesty’s Government have been glad to note that the Soviet authorities have now agreed to stop removing equipment from the oil fields in Roumania in which British interests are involved and have also agreed that the Ruat plant should remain in situ. But if the large quantities of equipment which have already been removed are not to be returned, His Majesty’s Government considers that they must be regarded as deliveries on account of reparations, and arrangements made for compensating the oil companies. Similarly, the Ruat plant should be restored to its previous condition and brought into production as soon as possible. As the Soviet Government have made no attempt to refute the argument advanced by His Majesty’s Government that any equipment which may be removed should be regarded as reparation and not as war booty, His Majesty’s Government can only refer the Soviet Government to the statement of the case which has already been made. It should also be pointed out that these difficulties would never have arisen if the Soviet representatives in Roumania had discussed problems affecting the Roumanian oil industry with their British and American colleagues on the Control Commission instead of taking unilateral action.

180

Harriman Memorandum of Conversations

Leningrad, February 10, 1945, 2:00 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Top secret
1st Conversation
Present: Mr. Harriman Date: February 10, 1945
Mr. Molotov Time: 2:00 PM
Mr. Pavlov Place: Koreis
2nd Conversation
Present: The President Date: February 10, 1945
Mr. Harriman Time: [blank]
Place: Livadia Palace
3rd Conversation
Present: The President Date: February 10, 1945
Mr. Harriman Time: 4:30 PM
Marshal Stalin Place: Livadia Palace

Subject: THE FAR EAST – POLITICAL

At Mr. Molotov’s request I called on him at Koreis at 2:00 p.m. He handed me in English translation the draft of Marshal Stalin’s political conditions for Russia’s entry in the war against Japan as discussed with the President on February 8.

I explained to Molotov that there were three amendments I believed the President would wish to make before accepting:

  1. b) should indicate Stalin’s readiness to accept the President’s proposal that Port Arthur and Dairen should be free ports and 2. c) should cover the alternative of the railways being operated by a Chinese-Soviet Commission, both of which Marshal Stalin had agreed to. In addition, I said I felt sure that the President would not wish to dispose finally of these two matters in which China was interested without the concurrence of the Generalissimo.

Mr. Molotov indicated that Marshal Stalin had agreed to the first two points but it took me some time to explain to Molotov the reasons for the last. I agreed to submit to Molotov the President’s suggested revisions.

On my return to Livadia I showed the President the proposed draft (copy attached) with the amendments covering the points mentioned (copy of amendments attached): The President approved and authorized me to resubmit them to Mr. Molotov, which I did.

After the formal Conference meeting in the afternoon between the President, the Prime Minister, Marshal Stalin and their associates, Marshal Stalin came to me to explain the further changes he had in mind for the Agreement. He said that he was entirely willing to have Dairen a free port under international control, but that Port Arthur was different, it was to be a Russian naval base and therefore Russia required a lease.

I suggested to Marshal Stalin that he take the opportunity to discuss this matter at once with the President, which he thereupon did.

The President agreed to Marshal Stalin’s revised proposal regarding the ports as above.

Marshal Stalin then explained that he agreed it would be more appropriate for the Manchurian Railroads to be operated by a Chinese-Soviet Commission. He further agreed in the need for concurrence of the Generalissimo on these matters but stated that the Generalissimo should also give his concurrence to status quo in Outer Mongolia.

The President asked Marshal Stalin whether he (Stalin) wished to take these matters up with T. V. Soong when he came to Moscow or whether Stalin wished the President to take them up with the Generalissimo.

Marshal Stalin replied that as he was an interested party he would prefer to have the President do it.

The President then asked when the subject should be discussed with the Generalissimo having in mind the question of secrecy.

Marshal Stalin said he would let the President know when he was prepared to have this done.

The President said that he would send an army officer from Washington through Moscow to Chungking with a letter of instructions to Ambassador Hurley in order to insure secrecy.

At that moment the Prime Minister interrupted the discussion. I had an opportunity later, however, to ask Marshal Stalin whether he would undertake to draft the further revisions, to which he replied in the affirmative.

W. A. HARRIMAN

  1. Attachments
[Attachment 1 — TRANSLATION]

Draft of Marshal Stalin’s Political Conditions for Russia’s Entry in the War Against Japan

The leaders of the three Great Powers – the Soviet Union, the United States of America and Great Britain have agreed that in two or three months after Germany has surrendered and the war in Europe has ended the Soviet Union shall enter into the war against Japan on the side of the Allies on condition that:

  1. Status quo in the Outer Mongolia (the Mongolian People’s Republic) should be preserved;
  2. The former rights of Russia violated by the treacherous attack of Japan in 1904 should be restored viz:

  • a) the southern part of Sakhalin as well as all the islands adjacent to this part of Sakhalin should be returned to the Soviet Union,

  • b) possession of Port Arthur and Dairen on lease should be restored.

  • c) the rights possessed by Russia before the Russo-Japanese war to the operation of the Chinese-Eastern Railroad and the South-Manchurian railroad providing an outlet to Dairen should be restored on the understanding that China should continue to possess full sovereignty in Manchuria;

  1. The Kurile islands should be handed over to the Soviet Union. The Heads of the three Great Powers have agreed that these claims of the Soviet Union should be unquestionably satisfied after Japan has been defeated.

For its part the Soviet Union expresses its willingness to conclude with the National Government of China a pact of friendship and alliance between the USSR and China in order to render assistance to China with its armed forces for the purpose of liberating China from the Japanese yoke.

[Attachment 2]

Mr. Harriman’s Suggested Changes in Marshal Stalin’s Draft of Russia’s Political Conditions for Russia’s Entry in the War Against Japan

Item 2 b)

possession lease of the port areas of Port Arthur and Dairen en lease should be restored, or these areas should become free ports under international control.

Item 2 c)

Add the following after the word “Manchuria;” at the end of the paragraph “or these railroads should be placed under the operational control of a Chinese-Soviet Commission.”

Item 3

Add final paragraph:

It is understood that the agreement concerning the ports and railways referred to above requires the concurrence of Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek.

NOTE: Portions crossed out are deletions and portions underlined are additions to original document.