Potsdam Conference (TERMINAL)

740.00119 (Potsdam)/7-2245

U.S. Delegation Memorandum

Potsdam, July 22, 1945, 11:10 a.m.
Top secret

Summary of the Meeting of Foreign Ministers Sunday Morning, July 22, 1945

1. Yalta Declaration on Liberated Areas and Satellite States
It was agreed to report to the Heads of Governments that no agreement could be reached on paragraph 1 of the U.S. paper relating to the observation of elections. Paragraphs 2 and 3 relating to freedom of the press and the Control Commissions were referred to a subcommittee which was instructed to examine the improvements recently made in the conduct of the Control Commissions in Bulgaria, Rumania and Hungary and to examine Soviet complaints in regard to the operation of the Allied Commission in Italy.

2. German Economic Questions
A number of paragraphs in the proposed agreement on economic principles presented yesterday by the Economic Subcommittee were approved. No presentation is made to the Heads of Governments, however, until the Foreign Ministers have discussed the subject further.

3. Rumanian Oil Equipment
There was extended discussion but no agreement on the question of the treatment of British and American oil equipment in Rumania.

4. Agenda for this afternoon’s Meeting of Heads of Governments
It was agreed that the following questions should be recommended to the Heads of Governments for their agenda for this afternoon:

  1. Western Frontier of Poland – carried over from yesterday.

  2. Trusteeship – carried over from yesterday.

  3. Turkey – carried over from yesterday.

  4. Western frontier of the Soviet Union. Mr. Molotov explained that he referred to that portion of East Prussia including Koenigsberg which the Soviet Union desires to annex.

  5. Iran – The British have presented a paper on this subject.

  6. Cooperation in Solving Immediate European Economic Problems. Mr. Byrnes said that he would ask the President to present a paper on this subject with the recommendation that it be referred to the Foreign Ministers for consideration.

Rapporteur’s Report

Potsdam, July 22, 1945, 11:10 a.m.

The meeting took note that the following subjects were still on the Agenda of the Foreign Secretaries:

  1. The admission of neutral states to the World Organisation, and the exclusion of the present Spanish Government.
  2. The Council of Five Foreign Ministers.
  3. Reparations from Italy and Austria.
  4. European oil supplies.
  5. Yalta Declaration on liberated Europe.
  6. German economic questions.
  7. The removal as booty of Allied industrial equipment especially in Roumania.

The meeting observed that questions 1-4 had been referred to various sub-committees or drafting committees and could not therefore be discussed at the meeting of Foreign Secretaries this morning. They therefore proceeded to a discussion of the three remaining questions.

Yalta Declaration on liberated Europe
The meeting had before it a memorandum submitted by the United States delegation on July 21st. This memorandum dealt with three questions:

  1. The observation of elections in certain European countries.
  2. Facilities for press representatives in liberated and former Axis satellite states.
  3. Procedure of Control Commissions in Roumania, Bulgaria and Hungary.

The British delegation expressed agreement with the United States memorandum.

The Soviet delegation was unable to agree with the proposal in regard to the observation of elections. As regards the second and third questions it was agreed that these should be referred to a subcommittee for discussion. This committee consisted of:

United States Mr. Cannon and Mr. Russell
Soviet Union Mr. Sobolev
United Kingdom Mr. Hayter

The Soviet delegation undertook to provide a memorandum showing recent improvements in the status of the British and American representatives on the Control Commissions in Roumania, Bulgaria and Hungary. The Soviet delegation also agreed to prepare a memorandum showing the changes which they felt desirable in regard to the procedure of the Allied Commission in Italy.

German economic questions
The Foreign Secretaries had before them a report by the Economic Sub-Committee. The United States Delegation asked for discussion on reparations to be postponed to a subsequent meeting and the Soviet Delegation asked that discussion should be confined to the economic principles which had been agreed by the Sub-Committee. The Foreign Secretaries therefore decided to discuss the agreed principles and not the principles in dispute or reparations questions. It was agreed that reparations should figure as the first item on the Agenda of the Foreign Secretaries for their meeting on July 23rd.

Paragraphs 11, 12, 14, 15 and 17 of the principles were agreed, subject to agreement on the points remaining in dispute.

As regards the remainder:
Paragraph 10. It was agreed to amend the last sentence to read as follows:

Productive capacity not needed for permitted production shall be removed in accordance with the reparations plan, recommended by the Allied Commission on Reparations and approved by the Governments concerned, or, if not removed, destroyed.

Paragraph 13. The Soviet Delegation proposed the addition to the first sentence of wording to the following effect: “according to detailed instructions to be issued by the Control Council in accordance with the principles set out in this Agreement.”

The U.S. Delegation asked for time to consider this and the point was therefore reserved.

Paragraph 16.
It was pointed out that this paragraph referred to an annex dealing with reparations and was therefore reserved.

Paragraph 18.
The Soviet Delegation asked for the deletion of this paragraph. As, however, this paragraph was one of those in dispute, it was agreed that it must be reserved.

Removal as booty of Allied industrial equipment especially in Roumania
A general discussion took place on this question on the basis of a memorandum submitted by the United Kingdom delegation on July 19th. No agreement was reached and the question was adjourned for further consideration.

Agenda for the Plenary Meeting
The Foreign Secretaries agreed to recommend as the agenda for this afternoon’s meeting the following items:

  1. The western frontier of Poland (resumption of discussion).
  2. Trusteeship (adjourned from yesterday’s plenary meeting).
  3. Turkey (adjourned from yesterday’s plenary meeting).
  4. Partial change of the western frontier of the Soviet Union (proposal of the Soviet Delegation).
  5. Persia (memorandum submitted by the United Kingdom delegation on July 21st).

Certain further topics were proposed for remission to the Foreign Secretaries’ meeting on July 22nd. These were as follows:

  • Co-operation in solving immediate European economic problems (proposal of U.S. delegation).

  • Directive from heads of Governments for the control of Germany in accordance with the principles heretofore agreed (proposal of U.S. delegation).

  • Tangier (proposal of Soviet delegation).

  • Syria and Lebanon (proposal of Soviet delegation).

It is hoped that it may be agreed to refer these at once to the Committee of Foreign Secretaries without discussion at this stage by the plenary meeting.

Truman-Churchill meeting, 12:15 p.m.

Present
United States United Kingdom
President Truman Prime Minister Churchill
[Fleet Admiral Leahy?]
[General of the Army Marshall?]

Churchill: “The President invited me to confer with him forthwith. He had with him General Marshall and Admiral Leahy.”

Truman: “The final decision of where and when to use the atomic bomb was up to me.… I regarded the bomb as a military weapon and never had any doubt that it should be used. The top military advisers to the President recommended its use, and when I talked to Churchill he unhesitatingly told me that he favored the use of the atomic bomb if it might aid to end the war.”

Sixth plenary meeting, 5 p.m.

Present
United States United Kingdom Soviet Union
President Truman Prime Minister Churchill Generalissimo Stalin
Secretary Byrnes Foreign Secretary Eden Foreign Commissar Molotov
Fleet Admiral Leahy Mr. Attlee Mr. Vyshinsky
Mr. Harriman Sir Alexander Cadogan Mr. Gromyko
Mr. Pauley Sir Archibald Clark Kerr Mr. Gusev
Mr. Davies Sir William Strang Mr. Novikov
Mr. Dunn Major Birse Mr. Sobolev
Mr. Clayton Mr. Pavlov
Mr. Cohen
Mr. Matthews
Mr. Bohlen
Mr. Thompson

Thompson Minutes

Potsdam, July 22, 1945, 5 p.m.
Top secret

STALIN announced that the withdrawal of the Soviet troops in Austria had begun today. He said that they would have to withdraw for a distance of about 100 kilometers and that the movement would be completed by July 24.

MR. CHURCHILL said that he was very gratified that Marshal Stalin had so quickly carried out his agreement.

THE PRESIDENT said that he was also appreciative.

STALIN replied that it had merely been their duty.

THE PRESIDENT called upon Mr. Eden to present his report of the morning meeting of the Foreign Ministers.

MR. EDEN then read the following report:

The Foreign Ministers this morning had discussed the following subjects:

1. The Yalta Declaration on Liberated Europe
The meeting had before it a memorandum submitted by the United States delegation on July 21st. This memorandum dealt with three questions:

  1. The observation of elections in certain European countries.
  2. Facilities for press representatives in liberated and former Axis satellite states.
  3. Procedure of Control Commissions in Roumania, Bulgaria and Hungary.

The British delegation expressed agreement with the United States memorandum.

The Soviet delegation was unable to agree with the proposal in regard to the observation of elections. As regards the second and third questions it was agreed that these should be referred to a subcommittee for discussion.

The Soviet delegation undertook to provide a memorandum showing recent improvements in the status of the British and American representatives on the Control Commissions in Roumania, Bulgaria and Hungary. The Soviet delegation also agreed to prepare a memorandum showing the changes which they felt desirable in regard to the procedure of the Allied Commission in Italy.

2. German Economic Questions
The Foreign Secretaries had before them a report by the Economic Sub-Committee. The United States Delegation asked for discussion on reparations to be postponed to a subsequent meeting and the Soviet Delegation asked that discussion should be confined to the economic principles which had been agreed by the Sub-Committee. The Foreign Secretaries therefore decided to discuss the agreed principles and not the principles in dispute or reparations questions. It was agreed that reparations should figure as the first item on the Agenda of the Foreign Secretaries for their meeting on July 23rd.

Paragraph 10 was slightly amended and agreed to. The wording of paragraph 13 is still under discussion.

Paragraphs 11, 12, 14, 15, and 17 of the principles were agreed subject to agreement on the points remaining in dispute. Paragraphs 16 and 18 were reserved.

MR. MOLOTOV interrupted to state that this was not accurate as paragraphs 13 and 18 remained.

MR. EDEN pointed out that he had said that paragraph 13 was still under discussion.

Continuing the reading of his report MR. EDEN said that the only other questions discussed were:

3. Removal as Booty of Allied Industrial Equipment Especially in Roumania
A general discussion took place on this question on the basis of a memorandum submitted by the United Kingdom delegation on July 19th. No agreement was reached and the question was adjourned for further consideration.

4. Agenda for the Plenary Meeting
The Foreign Secretaries agreed to recommend as the agenda for this afternoon’s meeting the following items:

  1. The Western Frontier of Poland (resumption of discussion).
  2. Trusteeship (adjourned from yesterday’s plenary meeting).
  3. Turkey (adjourned from yesterday’s plenary meeting).
  4. Partial change of the Western Frontier of the Soviet Union (proposal of the Soviet Delegation).
  5. Persia (memorandum submitted by the United Kingdom delegation on July 21st).

Certain further topics were proposed for remission to the Foreign Secretaries’ meeting on July 22nd. These were as follows:

  • Cooperation in solving immediate European economic problems (proposal of U.S. delegation).

  • Directive from heads of Governments for the control of Germany in accordance with the principles heretofore agreed (proposal of U.S. delegation).

  • Tangier (proposal of Soviet delegation).

  • Syria and Lebanon (proposal of Soviet delegation).

It is hoped that it may be agreed to refer these at once to the Committee of Foreign Secretaries without discussion at this stage by the plenary meeting.

THE PRESIDENT asked if the agenda as proposed was accepted.

STALIN said he had no objection.

CHURCHILL said he did not know what the proposals were with regard to Syria and Lebanon. These matters affected the British very much. Only British troops were involved. They were ready to withdraw from Syria and Lebanon; they did not want anything there. There was difficulty in doing this at the present time as their withdrawal would be followed by the massacre of the French. He would like to know what was proposed before he made up his mind.

MOLOTOV said that what they had in mind was that the Government of Syria had approached the Soviet Government. The Soviet Government had addressed a note on this matter to the United States, British and French Governments.

CHURCHILL inquired if a communication had been sent to China.

MOLOTOV replied that it had not. He went on to say that they would like to have some information in the matter since it affected Soviet interests. He thought that a preliminary discussion could be held in the Foreign Minister’s meeting.

STALIN said that the Soviets had made no proposals with regard to the removal of the troops of any country.

CHURCHILL said he persisted that the discussion be opened up at the present meeting.

THE PRESIDENT suggested that the first three of the four topics proposed for remission to the Foreign Ministers be referred to them and that the fourth question relating to Syria and Lebanon be discussed by the Heads of Government at the next meeting.

This was agreed to.

Western Frontier of Poland

THE PRESIDENT said that he had already stated the case so far as the United States was concerned.

MOLOTOV said that the Soviet delegation wished to place another matter on the agenda of the meeting today. They wished to make a statement with regard to the prisoner-of-war camp in Italy in which Soviet prisoners were held.

This was agreed to.

CHURCHILL inquired if the camp were under British or American control.

STALIN replied that it was under British control.

CHURCHILL said that he had nothing to add to his statement on Poland.

STALIN inquired if his colleagues had seen the statement made by the Polish Government.

THE PRESIDENT and CHURCHILL said that they had read the Polish statement.

STALIN then observed that all delegations maintained their views which meant that the question remained unsettled.

THE PRESIDENT proposed to proceed to the next question.

CHURCHILL inquired if this meant that nothing would be done.

THE PRESIDENT said that the question could be brought up again at any time while they were in session.

CHURCHILL said that they must hope that the matter would be ripe for discussion sometime before their departure. It would be very unfortunate if they parted with an important question like this unsettled, leaving the matter to be discussed in the parliaments of the world.

STALIN then suggested that they comply with the request of the Polish Government.

CHURCHILL rejoined that this was totally unacceptable.

STALIN asked why.

CHURCHILL said he had given a number of reasons the day before, the chief of which were:

  1. that it had been agreed that boundaries should be determined at the peace settlement.

  2. that it was not advantageous to Poland to take so much German territory.

  3. that it would rupture the economic position of Germany and throw an undue burden on the occupying powers.

  4. that they would have a grave moral responsibility for the transfer of enormous populations. The British had accepted in principle the transfer of the population from the east of the Curzon line. He was bound to state, however, that he considered that to transfer a population of from 8½ to 9 million people would be wrong.

  5. that the data on this subject was not agreed. The British information was that from 8 to 9 million Germans were in this area. The Soviet delegation said that they had already gone. This should be cleared up. The British did not now have any opportunity to know what the facts were but until they had some evidence to the contrary they would have to use their own estimates.

CHURCHILL said there were other reasons for opposing the proposal but he did not wish to burden the Conference with them now.

STALIN said he was not undertaking to oppose Mr. Churchill’s views on all the points he had raised but there were two that were particularly important. With regard to the question of fuel, he said that Germany would have fuel in the Ruhr and the Rhineland. There was no great difficulty for Germany caused by the loss of Silesia for Germany’s main base for coal was in the west.

The second important point was the question of the transfer of populations. There were neither 8 nor 6 nor 3 million Poles [Germans] in this area. There had been several call ups of troops in this area and many of these people had been killed. Very few Germans had remained there and those who remained had fled before the Red Army. He said that this could be checked. They can arrange for representatives of the Polish Provisional Government to come to the Conference where they could hear what they had to say.

CHURCHILL said he hesitated to support this proposal because of the views expressed by the President the other day with regard to representatives of the Yugoslav Government.

STALIN then proposed that they let the Council of Foreign Ministers which was being set up call in the Polish representatives and hear them.

THE PRESIDENT said he did not object.

MR. CHURCHILL pointed out that the Council would not meet until September 1.

STALIN said that all three parties would be able to collect information by that time.

CHURCHILL said that this would merely transfer the difficulty from this Conference to the Council of Foreign Ministers. They were in a better position at this meeting to decide the matter.

STALIN said that under the Crimean decisions they were bound to hear the Poles on the question of frontiers.

CHURCHILL inquired if the President agreed to send this whole matter to the Council of Foreign Ministers.

THE PRESIDENT said that doing this would not prevent further discussion at this meeting. They could not agree now and he proposed that they take up something else.

STALIN said he continued to urge that they adopt the decision that the Council of Foreign Ministers should call representatives of the Polish Provisional Government to hear their point of view on the frontier question.

CHURCHILL inquired how this could be decided in that way when it was a question which had to be decided at the peace conference.

THE PRESIDENT pointed out that the Council of Foreign Ministers would not take a final decision. Their discussions would, however, be helpful.

STALIN said that this was correct.

CHURCHILL said he would regret that this grave matter should be sent to a body of less importance.

STALIN rejoined that they should then invite the Poles to come to this meeting.

CHURCHILL said he would prefer this because the matter was urgent. He added however that the Poles would ask for more than he could accept.

STALIN pointed out that if they invited the Poles, the Poles would not be able to accuse the Big Three of not hearing them.

THE PRESIDENT said he did not see the urgency of the matter. It would be helpful to have a preliminary discussion and the matter would not finally be settled until the peace conference.

CHURCHILL said that with great respect he wished to explain the urgency of the matter. If the settlement of the question were delayed the present local situation would be consolidated. Poles would be digging themselves in and taking effective steps to make themselves the sole masters of this territory. The longer the problem waited the more difficult it would be to settle it. They should at least see where they stood. There was no use of Poles coming to London when the great powers did not even know the broad outline of where they stood. Meanwhile the whole problem of food remained unsettled and the burden of feeding fell upon them. He pointed out that the British zone had the largest concentration of people and the smallest supply of food of any other zone. He suggested that they suppose that the Council of Foreign Ministers having heard the Poles could not agree, which was a possibility, and said that in this case there would be indefinite delay. The matter could not then be settled until there was another meeting of the Heads of Government. He was anxious to meet the practical difficulties which Stalin had put forward yesterday and which had resulted from the movement of troops. He was ready to suggest a compromise solution to cover the provisional period, that is, the period between the present time and the final conclusion of peace. He had in mind a line which might be drawn east of which the territory would be occupied by the Poles as a part of Poland. West of that line they would be working as agents of the Soviet Government which would be dealing with the zone in accordance with the agreement which had been reached with regard to the zones of occupation in Germany. He had had several talks with Marshal Stalin since the Tehran meeting and they were broadly in agreement on the line of the Oder. Of course the matter could not be so simply expressed. The difference between Marshal Stalin and himself was that the British did not want to go so far as the Soviets but they agreed that the Poles should have a large amount of territory. He said that when he referred to the line of the Oder he was using an expression which had been used when they had discussed the matter two years before. This was a very rough description but the British had a line which they were prepared to submit for the consideration of the Conference.

To adjourn until September and then have long discussions with the Poles would leave the matter unsettled by which time winter would be upon them. He thought that they should have some agreement on principle. He would like the Council of Foreign Ministers to meet and consider the matter on something like a general understanding between the three powers. Otherwise they would be left with all of their difficulties unsolved and after several months had elapsed a solution would be virtually impossible. He repeated that the line of the Oder was an approximate line and that it would be necessary to look at a map to see the line which the British had in view. He urged that they persevere in considering this matter. He inquired what would be the situation in Berlin if this matter were referred to the Council of Foreign Ministers. Berlin had obtained a portion of its coal from the Silesian mines. This was an important matter for the British. What would happen if the Governments were of the same opinion in September?

STALIN interrupted to say that it was Zwickau in Saxony from which Berlin drew its coal. He suggested that they let the Ruhr supply the coal, but he thought that Zwickau would be enough. He said there was good coal there and that they made briquettes out of brown coal.

CHURCHILL pointed out he had only said that a portion of the Berlin coal came from the Silesian mines.

THE PRESIDENT then read the pertinent portion of the Yalta Declaration concerning Poland’s western frontier. He said that this agreement had been reached between President Roosevelt, Marshal Stalin and Prime Minister Churchill. He was in complete accord with it. His point was that Poland had been assigned a zone of occupation in Germany and that there were now five occupying powers. They could agree to assigning a zone to Poland but he did not like the manner in which Poland had occupied a zone without any discussion of the matter between the three powers concerned. He appreciated the difficulties mentioned by Churchill and Stalin and he also had these difficulties in mind. The main problem was that of their occupation of Germany. That was his position yesterday, that was his position today, and that would be his position tomorrow.

STALIN said that if they were not bored with the question of frontiers, he would like to make a further statement. He also proceeded on the basis of the Crimean Conference decision. The exact character of this decision was that after the Government of National Unity was formed in Poland they were bound to receive the opinion of the Polish Government on the question of Poland’s western frontiers. There were two possibilities. One was to approve the Polish proposal and in this case it would not be necessary to call in the Poles. If they did not approve the Polish proposal, they could hear the Poles and then settle the question. He thought it was expedient to settle the matter now. As they were not in agreement with the Polish Government’s proposals they should hear their representatives. The view had been expressed that it would not be worthwhile to hear the Poles now. Then, they should send the matter to the Council of Foreign Ministers.

He wished to remind Mr. Churchill as well as others who were at the Crimea that the view held by the President and Churchill with regard to the western frontier and with which he did not agree was that the line should begin from the estuary of the Oder and follow the Oder to where the Eastern Neisse joins the Oder. He had insisted on the line of the Western Neisse. The plan proposed by President Truman and Prime Minister Churchill left the town of Stettin on the German side as well as Breslau and the region west of Breslau (At this point Stalin walked around the table and showed the President this line on a map). The question to be settled was that of the frontier and not that of a temporary line. They could settle the matter and they could put it off, but they could not ignore it.

CHURCHILL said he agreed that they could not settle the matter without the Poles, unless, of course, they accepted the Polish proposal.

STALIN said that with regard to the President’s observation that a fifth country had been brought in to occupy Germany and that he was displeased by the manner in which Poland had been brought in, he wished to state that if the President thought that anyone was to blame it was not just the Poles – circumstances and the Russians were to blame.

THE PRESIDENT remarked that he agreed and said that this was what he had been talking about.

CHURCHILL said he withdrew any objection to the Poles coming here and to their attempting to reach some kind of practical solution which could last until the matter was finally settled at the peace conference.

THE PRESIDENT said he agreed that they could come here and be heard by the Foreign Ministers. He did not wish to go into the matter.

STALIN remarked that this was satisfactory.

CHURCHILL said that the Foreign Ministers should then report to the Big Three.

This was agreed to.

CHURCHILL inquired as to who would issue the invitation.

STALIN said that it should be issued by the Chairman.

This was agreed to.

Trusteeship

MOLOTOV said that the Soviet proposals had been submitted in writing. He said that the statement made by the Soviet Delegation arose as a result of the San Francisco Conference. The trusteeship system had been settled in principle by the Charter. There was now the question of specific territories. It would not be possible to give a detailed consideration of the matter at this conference, but they could make some progress. He said that in the first place they could discuss Italy’s colonies in Africa and the Mediterranean. They had put forward two alternative proposals. These could be referred to the meeting of Foreign Ministers. Secondly, there was the question of territories under mandate from the League of Nations.

EDEN inquired what ones he had in mind and pointed out that there were only a few left to England and France.

MOLOTOV replied that it was a question worthy of the attention of the three Governments in accordance with the decision that had been taken at the San Francisco Conference. He said he thought they should also exchange views on the question of Korea.

CHURCHILL said he was ready to exchange views on any subject, but if they reached no agreement there would simply have been an interesting discussion. His impression was that the case of the existing mandates had been dealt with at San Francisco.

THE PRESIDENT then read Article 77 of the proposed Charter of the United Nations which deals with the question of trusteeships. He said that he took it that it was under section 2 of this Article that the Soviet Government wished to discuss this matter. He was ready to agree to refer it to the Foreign Ministers.

CHURCHILL said they had agreed to the project brought up at San Francisco and nothing more. He said that if the matter was in the hands of the World Organization he doubted if expressions of opinion around this table would be the best way to deal with it.

THE PRESIDENT said it was just as appropriate to discuss this matter as it was to discuss Poland or anything else.

CHURCHILL observed that Poland was not being dealt with by the International Organization.

THE PRESIDENT rejoined that it would be.

MOLOTOV said that his point was that the matter should be given some preliminary consideration. The final decision should be taken at the peace conference, the same as the case of Poland.

CHURCHILL said that their position had been settled secretly at Yalta and publicly at San Francisco and that it was not capable of being changed.

THE PRESIDENT remarked to Churchill that the British position was amply protected by another Article of the Charter and that he did not see why it could not be discussed.

MOLOTOV said that he had learned from the foreign press that Italy had lost its colonies once and for all. The question was “who had received them and where had this matter been decided.”

CHURCHILL replied by referring to the heavy losses which the British had suffered and the victories which the British army had achieved by conquering alone all of the colonies of Italy except Tunis.

THE PRESIDENT inquired “all?”

MOLOTOV pointed out that Berlin had been conquered by the Red Army.

CHURCHILL replied that when he referred to the Italian colonies he meant those of Libya, Cyrenaica, and Tripoli. They had conquered these at a time when they were under heavy attacks and were without help, at least during the early part.

STALIN replied that no one denied this.

CHURCHILL continued that they were not expecting gain out of this war. They had suffered terrible losses. Their losses had not been so heavy in human life as those of their gallant Soviet allies. They came out of the war, however, a great debtor to the world. There was no possibility of their regaining naval equality with the United States. During the war they had built only one capital ship and had lost ten or twelve. In spite of the heavy losses they had suffered, they had made no territorial claims – no Koenigsberg – no Baltic states – nothing. It was, therefore, having acted with complete rectitude, that they approached the question of the Italian colonies. With regard to these colonies Mr. Eden had said he regarded Italy as having lost these colonies, but that meant that Italy had no claim of right to these colonies. This did not preclude the peace conference from considering that some of these colonies should not be [should be?] restored to Italy. He did not say he favored that proposal but it was entirely open for discussion in the Council of Foreign Ministers when they were dealing with the peace with Italy and, of course, in the final peace settlement as well. Having visited Tripoli and Cyrenaica, he had seen reclamation work done by the Italians which was of an admirable character. While they did not declare themselves in favor of restoration, neither did they say that it was precluded from discussion. At present the British held these colonies. Who wanted them. If there were claimants they should put forward their claims.

THE PRESIDENT said that the United States did not want them nor did the United States want a trusteeship over them for ourselves. We had enough poor Italians to feed.

CHURCHILL said that they had wondered if any of these colonies were suitable as a place of settlement for the Jews, but those with whom they had discussed the matter had not been interested. He said, of course, the British had great interests in the Mediterranean and that any marked alteration in the status quo in the Mediterranean would need long and careful examination.

MOLOTOV said that the Soviet proposal[s] had been submitted in writing and that they would like the Conference to consider them.

CHURCHILL said he did not see what their Soviet allies wanted. Did Stalin wish to put forward a claim to one of these Italian colonies.

STALIN replied that they would like to learn whether the meeting would consider whether Italy would lose her colonies and that in such an event they could decide to what states they would be transferred for trusteeship. If it were premature to deal with the matter, they could wait.

CHURCHILL said he had not considered the possibility of the Soviet Union desiring to acquire a large tract of the African shore. If that were the case it would have to be considered in relation to many other problems.

STALIN said that at San Francisco the Soviet delegation had stated that they were anxious to receive mandates for certain territories, in a communication to Secretary Stettinius.

CHURCHILL said that the British did not seek territory.

STALIN repeated that the question was who would receive the colonies.

CHURCHILL said they would have to decide if they should be taken, as they had a right to do, and then to decide to whom they would be assigned to under trusteeship. This question belonged to the discussion of the peace treaty. The ultimate administration belonged to the United Nations Organization.

STALIN inquired if Mr. Churchill was suggesting that the present conference was not competent to settle this question.

CHURCHILL replied that it was not competent to settle the matter; that was for the peace conference. Of course, if they agreed here, that would facilitate matters.

STALIN said they were proposing not to settle the matter but to consider it.

CHURCHILL rejoined that they were considering the matter now.

STALIN inquired then why he objected to the Soviet proposal to have it discussed.

CHURCHILL said he was not objecting, that if Stalin could say what he wanted, he, Churchill, would address himself to the question.

STALIN said the matter did not lie with him. The question was set forth in the Soviet paper.

THE PRESIDENT pointed out that the Soviet proposal was for the Foreign Ministers to discuss the matter and he had no objection on his part.

CHURCHILL said he also had no objection but pointed out that they were throwing much work on the Foreign Ministers. He said there were many more urgent matters to discuss here. They had decided that the question of the Italian peace terms were [was] to have priority at the first meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers. He was against burdening the present meeting of the Foreign Ministers but the matter could be put on their agenda for consideration after they had disposed of more urgent business.

STALIN proposed that the matter be referred to the Foreign Ministers.

CHURCHILL added the reservation “provided it does not delay more urgent business.”

STALIN said that such a reservation was not acceptable.

CHURCHILL said that if they insisted he would give way.

It was agreed that the matter be referred to the meeting of Foreign Ministers.

Turkey

CHURCHILL said this was not the first time he had discussed this matter with Marshal Stalin. It became important because of the admitted need to modify the Montreux Convention. He had agreed with the Marshal in these discussions that insofar as the British Government was concerned they favored revision. Revision could only be made by agreement with the signatories with the exception, of course, of Japan. He had also frequently expressed his readiness to welcome an arrangement for the free movement of Russian ships, naval or merchant, through the Black Sea and back. He, therefore, opened the discussion on the basis of a friendly agreement. At the same time he wished to impress on Marshal Stalin the importance of not alarming Turkey. Undoubtedly Turkey was very much alarmed by a strong concentration of Bulgarian and Soviet troops in Bulgaria; by continuous attacks in the Soviet press and radio; and, of course, by the turn which the conversations between the Turkish Ambassador and Mr. Molotov had taken in which modifications of Turkey’s eastern frontier were mentioned, as well as a Soviet base in the Straits. This led Turkey to fear for the integrity of her empire and her power to defend Constantinople. He understood, however, that these were not demands on Turkey by the Soviet Government but that the Turks had asked for an alliance and then Molotov had stated the conditions for such an alliance. He quite saw that if Turkey asked for an offensive and defensive alliance, this would be the occasion when the Soviets would say what improvement they wanted in the Turkish situation. However, the Turks were alarmed by the mention of these conditions. He did not know what had happened beyond these conversations. What he should like to know was the present Russian position on the subject.

MOLOTOV said that he would circulate a letter to the President and Churchill giving the point of view of the Soviet Government on this question. He would like to explain the origin of the matter. The Turkish Government had taken the initiative through the Turkish Ambassador in Moscow and had proposed an alliance. This question had been brought up before their Ambassador in Ankara and again in Moscow at the end of May by the Turkish Ambassador. Early in June he had had two conversations with the Turkish Ambassador. In reply to the Turkish proposals he had stated that the Soviet Government had no objection to a treaty of alliance subject to certain conditions. He pointed out the fact that in doing so they should settle their mutual claims. On the Soviet side there were two. The conclusion of a treaty of alliance meant that they undertook each to defend the frontiers of both states. He had pointed out that there were several sections of their frontiers which they considered unjust. In 1921 a portion of their territory had been torn from Soviet Armenia and Soviet Georgia. He pointed out that he was bound to settle this question before the conclusion of a treaty of alliance.

The second question was that of the Black Sea Straits. The Soviet Union had repeatedly let their allies know that they could not regard the Montreux Convention as a correct arrangement and that they were not satisfied with it. The rights of the Soviet Union under this Convention were equal to those of the Japanese Emperor. It seemed to them that this did not correspond to the present situation. On behalf of the Soviet Government he had presented certain proposals which had been set forth in the Soviet paper which he was now circulating. At the same time, he had pointed out to the Turks that if both of these issues were settled the Russians were ready to conclude an alliance. He had also informed the Turks that the Soviet Union was prepared to settle any questions which the Turks raised on their side. He had added that if the Turkish Government were not prepared to settle these two questions the Soviet Government was prepared to make an agreement on the Straits alone between the Black Sea Powers.

CHURCHILL said that this was an important document which went far beyond the conversations between Eden and himself and Stalin and Molotov.

MOLOTOV said that the treaty of alliance with Turkey had not been under consideration at that time.

CHURCHILL inquired whether the words “proper regular procedure” in paragraph one of the Soviet paper meant that all signatories except Japan would be consulted. He repeated [that] different questions were raised in this paper, when a Russian base in the Straits was asked for; also by the proposal that no one had anything to do with the Bosporus and the Dardanelles except Russia and Turkey. He was certain that Turkey would never agree to this proposal that was being made.

MOLOTOV said that similar treaties had existed in the past between Russia and Turkey.

CHURCHILL asked if he meant the question of a Russian base in the Black Sea Straits.

MOLOTOV replied that he meant treaties which provided for the settlement of the Straits question only by Turkey and Russia. He referred to the treaties of 1805 and 1833.

CHURCHILL said he would have to ask his staff to look up these ancient treaties and added that he had only pointed out the difference between these proposals and those which had earlier been discussed. He said that the British were not prepared to push Turkey to accept these proposals.

STALIN said that they had not discussed the proposals before but had only had conversations.

MOLOTOV said that they had proposed to submit the matter to the June meeting of the Foreign Ministers which had not taken place.

CHURCHILL said that he stood by his conversations with Stalin in which he, Churchill, expressed the willingness to press for the revision of the Montreux Convention side by side with Stalin. That agreement still stood, but he felt quite free with regard to these new proposals.

STALIN said: “Yes,” he was free.

THE PRESIDENT said he was not ready to express an opinion and suggested that they defer consideration of the question.

This was agreed to.

THE PRESIDENT said that they were sending a telegram to the Polish Government and as the matter was sure to leak out he suggested that they prepare a communiqué.

CHURCHILL inquired whether it would mention the purpose of the visit.

STALIN said it would be better not to mention the purpose of the visit, but it made no difference to him whether they issued a communiqué or not. Stalin thought it better not to release the whole text of the invitation.

THE PRESIDENT said he agreed.

MOLOTOV said that the Soviet Delegation would send in its proposal with regard to Koenigsberg in writing.

Treatment of Soviet Prisoners in a British Camp in Italy

MOLOTOV said that the camp referred to was camp no. 5 which was located near Rimini. He said that this camp, which was under British authorities, contained Ukrainians. The first statement they had received from the British stated that there were about 150 prisoners in this camp. When their representatives came to see the camp they found that there were 10,000.

CHURCHILL inquired from whom they had obtained these figures and on what date.

MOLOTOV said he would give particulars.

CHURCHILL said that the British did not make false statements.

MOLOTOV said that he understood that the British had formed a whole division of twelve regiments of these Ukrainians with officers selected from those who had been in the ranks of the German army. When their representatives had visited this camp they had found that 665 persons stated their willingness to return to their native country.

CHURCHILL said they welcomed inspection by the Russians of all of their camps. Perhaps some of these persons were Poles. In any event, he would have an investigation made and obtain a report.

MOLOTOV replied that there were only Ukrainians in the camp. He added that they had received a telegram from General Golikov, who was in charge of the repatriation of Soviet prisoners, only today.

Meeting adjourned.

Cohen Notes

Potsdam, July 22, 1945, 5 p.m.

STALIN: The withdrawal of Soviet troops from the north Soviet zones in Vienna has begun, and should be completed in a few days.

CHURCHILL: The British government is pleased to learn of this prompt action.

TRUMAN: So is the American government.

EDEN: (reads the report of the Foreign Secretaries).

The paper of the American delegation on the southeastern European satellite countries was presented to the Foreign Secretaries. The British agreed with the paper, but the Soviets were unable to agree with the provisions for the reorganization of the government and the election.

The matter of the press and the control exercised by the control commissions were referred to the subcommittee for discussions.

The Soviet delegation agreed to submit a memorandum on the improvement of the control commission in Italy.

The Secretaries considered the economic committee’s report on German economic problems. The United States asked postponement of disputed issues for subsequent meeting. Foreign Secretaries agreed to discuss only principles agreed to by the subcommittee. These agreed principles were accepted, except for the wording of paragraph 13.

The discussions on paragraph 18 and annex to paragraph 16 were also reserved.

The Foreign Secretaries also discussed the removal of Allied industrial equipment in Rumania, on the ground that it was booty, but no conclusions were reached.

The agenda for the Big Three Meeting was submitted. It included the western frontier of Poland, trusteeships, the straits, the western frontier of the Soviet Union, and Iran. It was suggested that certain problems be referred by the Big Three to the Foreign Secretaries for discussion, to save the time of the Big Three. These problems included cooperation on European economic problems, Tangier, and the problem of Syria and the Lebanon.

STALIN: I agree that we should submit these problems to the Foreign Secretaries without further discussion here.

CHURCHILL: Syria and Lebanon affect us specially. We want to withdraw from there as soon as possible, but our immediate withdrawal would mean the massacre of the French. I should like to hear more on this here. Possibly we can discuss it here.

STALIN: The government of Syria has asked the Soviet [Government] to intervene. We should like some information on this matter. This might be discussed by the Foreign Secretaries. We do not propose the removal of troops from any country.

TRUMAN: I suggest that this matter be deferred until tomorrow and that the other questions go to the Foreign Secretaries.

(This was agreed).

TRUMAN: We now may discuss the western frontier of Poland. I have already stated my views.

MOLOTOV: (First brought up the question of certain Soviet war prisoners held in Italy. He gave notice that he would like to say a few words on this subject at the close of the meeting.)

STALIN: Have you seen the statement by the Polish government on the frontiers?

CHURCHILL and TRUMAN both indicated that they had.

STALIN: That means all the delegations maintain their existing views, and the question remains in suspense.

TRUMAN: Next subject is trusteeships.

CHURCHILL: We must hope that the Polish question will become ripe for discussion before we leave. It would be unfortunate to have all these problems discussed in Parliament.

STALIN: Let us accept the Polish proposal.

CHURCHILL: I am sorry we cannot. The matter, of course, is for the peace table, but the Polish problem is not advantageous for Poland. It destroys Germany’s economic integrity, and puts an undue burden on the occupying powers. I have grave moral scruples regarding great movements and transfers of populations. Nine million people are involved. True, there is no agreement on the population data. The Soviets say only a few million are left. We should clear up the facts. I could give other reasons, but I won’t burden you now.

STALIN: I have undertaken [shall not undertake?] to oppose Mr. Churchill’s views on all these points, but I will deal here only with two. One, Germany will have resources in the Ruhr and the Rhineland, so there is no great difficulty if Silesian coal basin is taken from Germany. Two, the movement of population does not present the difficulties Mr. Churchill anticipates. There are neither eight nor six nor three million Germans in this area. There have been several call-ups of troops in this area. Few Germans remain. Our data can be checked. Could we not arrange for representatives of the Polish government to come here and be heard?

CHURCHILL: I should hesitate to support that, in view of the strong views of the President regarding hearing the Yugoslavs.

STALIN: Let the Foreign Ministers in London call them and hear them.

TRUMAN: That is satisfactory.

STALIN: The Polish government must be heard in answer to the Crimea decision. I continue to urge the meeting to adopt the decision that the Foreign Ministers in London should hear the Polish government on the western frontier.

CHURCHILL: How can the frontier be discussed that way? I regret that this grave matter should be adjourned to a lesser body.

STALIN: We must not be accused of settling the frontier without hearing the Poles.

TRUMAN: I cannot see the urgency. The question can be settled only by the peace conference.

CHURCHILL: There is urgency, Mr. President. The local situation will be unremedied. The Poles who have been assigned this large area will have digged themselves in. This process will continue and it will be more difficult to settle or to revise as time passes. So I still hope that some arrangement will be made here. The situation will not be improved by hearing the Poles when the great Allies are not agreed on principles.

The burden falls on us, the British in particular. Our zone has the smallest supply of food and the greatest density of population. Suppose the Foreign Ministers, having heard the Poles, cannot agree. Then there will be indefinite delay, at least until another meeting of the heads of government. I am anxious to meet practical problems due to the march of events which the Marshal referred to. We should be prepared to consider a compromise solution to cover the period between now and the peace settlement. We would be ready to suggest a provisional line. The Poles west of that line would be working for the Soviet occupying authority. I think Marshal Stalin and I agree up to this point, that the new Poland should advance to the Oder. But the difficulty between the Marshal and me is that I do not go quite as far as the Marshal. Is there no use for us to look at anything like this suggested compromise, Mr. President? We should not despair of solutions. We should seek a halfway house. Delay now might make it impossible to alter the consolidated position of the Poles later.

Berlin draws its coal from the Silesian mines, which have long been worked by Polish miners. What is to happen to Berlin’s coal during the winter?

STALIN: Berlin draws her coal from Saxony. Let the Ruhr give her coal. There are different opportunities for supplying Berlin with coal.

TRUMAN: May I re-state my view point. The eastern frontier should follow the Curzon line, with slight digression in favor of Poland. The Allies recognize that Poland must receive substantial compensation in the north and west. They believe the new Polish government should be heard, and the final settlement await the peace conference. That was the agreement of Mr. Roosevelt with the Big Three at Crimea. I am in complete accord with it; but Poland has in fact been assigned a zone of occupation contrary to our agreement. We can agree, if we wish to give the Poles an occupying zone, but I don’t like the way the Poles have taken or been given their zone.

STALIN: I also proceed on the decision of the Crimea Conference cited by the President. After the Government of National Unity has been formed, we are bound to seek its opinion. The Polish government have communicated their views. We have two alternatives: one, to approve the Polish proposal; or, two, to hear the Poles and settle the question.

I think it expedient to settle the question now. As we are not in agreement with the Polish government, the Poles should be summoned here. But the view was expressed by the President that the Poles cannot be heard here, so we must remit the question to the Foreign Ministers.

At Crimea, the President and Mr. Churchill suggested the line should be along the Oder until it joined the Neisse. I insisted on the western Neisse. Under Churchill’s plan, Stettin and Breslau would remain German. The question to be settled is the frontier, and not a temporary line. We can either settle the question or ignore it.

CHURCHILL: Or decide it without the Poles.

STALIN: If we disagree with the Poles we cannot decide it without them. It has been said that a fifth country has been brought into occupied Germany, and in a manner contrary to our agreement. If anyone is to blame, circumstances as well as the Russians are to blame.

CHURCHILL: I withdraw my objection to the Poles coming here and trying to work out arrangements pending the peace conference.

TRUMAN: I have no objection to the Poles coming here, and for the Foreign Secretaries to hear them.

STALIN: The Chairman should invite them.

TRUMAN: The matter of trusteeships is now before us. We will hear the Soviet delegation.

STALIN: Mr. Molotov is our expert.

MOLOTOV: The proposals of the Soviets are submitted in writing. The principal question has been settled by the San Francisco Charter. We have before us specific questions regarding the assignments of territorial trusteeships. It is not possible for us to give detailed answers to these questions, but some progress can be made. First, we can discuss Italian possessions in Africa. We can proceed in one of two ways. We suggest that the matter go to the Foreign Secretaries, or we could consider the questions here tomorrow. There is also the question of the mandated territories.

EDEN: Do you want our mandates?

STALIN: There are other mandates. The question deserves the attention of the Big Three. One point more, we could exchange views on Korea.

CHURCHILL: We can exchange views on any subject, but at the end we have had only an interesting discussion. The existing mandates were dealt with at San Francisco.

(TRUMAN reads Articles 77 to 79 of the Charter. He points out that mandated territory cannot be [placed under?] trusteeship without the consent of the mandatory power. He assumes that it is the territory detached from the present enemy powers that the Soviets wish to discuss, and indicates that he is willing to have the matter referred to the Foreign Secretaries.)

CHURCHILL: We have agreed to the San Francisco draft, nothing [Page 265]more. As this matter is in the hands of the world organization, I doubt that this is a matter to be discussed around this table.

TRUMAN: Article 79 gives you complete protection on your mandated territory.

STALIN: Eden said Italy lost her colonies. Who gets them?

CHURCHILL: The British alone conquered the Italian armies.

TRUMAN: Alone?

STALIN: But Berlin was taken by the Red Army.

CHURCHILL: I meant the Italian colonies, Mr. President, were taken by us.

STALIN: No one denies. It is to the honor and glory of Britain.

CHURCHILL: We do not seek territorial aggrandizement. We have suffered grievous losses, though not so great in human life as has Russia. We come out of the war a great debtor. We have no possibility of regaining naval equality with the United States. Yet, in spite of all these losses, we have made no territorial claims. We have no Koenigsberg, nor Baltic States. We claim nothing. Having acted with rectitude and complete disinterestedness, we approach the question of the Italian colonies with good conscience.

Mr. Eden made the statement in Parliament that Italy had lost her colonies. That meant she had no claim to them as a matter of right. That does not preclude the return of certain colonies to her, if the peace conference so decides. I do not say I favor the return of the colonies, but so far as we are concerned, it is a question open for discussion. I have seen the excellent reclamation work done by the Italians in Libya and Cyrenaica. At present we hold these colonies. Who wants them?

TRUMAN: We do not want them. We do not want a trusteeship for them. We have enough “poor Italians” to feed in the United States [in Italy?].

CHURCHILL: We considered them for Jewish settlement, but the Jews are not attracted to them. Of course, we have great interest in the Mediterranean.

STALIN: Our proposals are submitted in writing, and we would like the conference to consider them.

CHURCHILL: Does the Marshal wish to put forward a claim to these colonies, or to a trusteeship for them?

STALIN: Do we consider it necessary for Italy to lose these colonies? If so, to what states do we propose to entrust the trusteeships? If it is premature to deal with this question, we can wait, but we will have to deal with it sooner or later.

CHURCHILL: I am frank to say I have not considered the possibility of Russia claiming territory in the Mediterranean.

STALIN: The Soviet delegation stated at San Francisco that we were anxious to receive mandates for certain territories.

TRUMAN: I have a copy of the statement that Mr. Molotov gave Mr. Stettinius.

CHURCHILL: We have the right to take the colonies from Italy, but to whom shall we give them? That belongs to the discussion of the peace treaty. The administration of trusteeships is for the world organization.

STALIN: Is it your position that the present conference is qualified to settle the question?

CHURCHILL: Of course, if we three agree, it facilitates settlement.

STALIN: Of course the conference is qualified to consider.

CHURCHILL: I make no objection. I am prepared to hear the Marshal’s views.

STALIN: The question has been submitted in writing.

TRUMAN: Let the Foreign Secretaries consider it.

CHURCHILL: I have no objection, but we are over-burdening the Foreign Secretaries. There are more urgent problems. We are agreed that the Italian treaty should have priority when the council of Foreign Ministers meets in September.

STALIN: Let us submit the question to the Ministers.

CHURCHILL: Yes, if they have time after considering more urgent questions.

STALIN: There should be no reservation.

TRUMAN: Let us turn to the British paper regarding Turkey.

CHURCHILL: This comes up because of the need to modify the Montreux Conference [Convention]. At Yalta, I told the Marshal we would favor the revision of the Convention, but that can be done only with the consent of the signatories, except Japan, with whom we are at war. I have also expressed our readiness to welcome the free movement of Russian ships, whether war or merchant ships, in or out of the Black Sea in time of peace or war. So we start on a friendly basis.

Still, I wish to impress on the Marshal the importance of not alarming Turkey. Undoubtedly Turkey is much alarmed, because of the concentration of Russian and Bulgarian troops on her borders, by the attacks on her by the Russian radio, and the course of the conversation between the Turkish Ambassador and Mr. Molotov, at which a modification of the Turkish eastern frontiers was mentioned. Also, a base in the Straits. This led Turkey to fear for the integrity of her empire, and the power to defend Constantinople. I understand that these were not demands made on the Turkish government, but were stated as conditions of alliance proposed by the Turks. I can see that in the consideration of such alliance, the Russians would state what improvements they desired in the Turkish situation. But the Turks were under alarm. What I should like to know is, what is the present Russian position on this subject?

MOLOTOV: I have now circulated the views of the Soviet government as set forth in writing.

I should like to explain the origin of the question. This was brought up by the Turkish government with our Ambassador, and later by the Turkish Ambassador with me. Early in June I had two conversations with the Turkish Ambassador. In reply to the Turkish proposal for an alliance, I stated Russia had no objection, subject to certain conditions. We should first settle mutual claims. I mentioned two questions on our side. The treaty of alliance means we jointly undertake to defend the frontiers of two states. I pointed out that we could not undertake to defend certain sections of the frontier which we considered unjust. In 1921 part of this territory was torn from the Soviet Union – part of Armenia and part of Soviet Georgia. I pointed out that these territories should be restored. We should also have an alteration of our rights in the Straits. And a base.

On behalf of the Soviets, I have put forward our claims in the paper circulated. I pointed out to the Turks that if they were prepared to settle the two questions, we were prepared to make an alliance and settle any questions they wished to have settled. If the Turkish government was not prepared, the Soviets were prepared to make an agreement regarding the Straits only.

CHURCHILL: May we have a moment to read your statement?

MOLOTOV: Yes.

CHURCHILL: This is a very important document. It goes far beyond any of our discussions. I presume “regular procedure” in paragraph one means consultation with all signatories but Japan. Quite a different question is raised when Russia asks for a military base and asks that no powers be permitted to participate in control of the Straits but Russia and Turkey. I am quite certain Turkey will never agree to this.

STALIN: Similar treaties existed between Turkey and Russia at other times.

CHURCHILL: What times do you refer to?

STALIN: In 1805 and 1833.

CHURCHILL: These suggestions are wholly different from our previous talks. I stand by my talk with the Marshal when I promised to support revision of the Montreux Convention, but I feel quite free as to these new proposals.

STALIN: You are quite free.

CHURCHILL: I thank you.

MOLOTOV: May we submit our proposals on Koenigsberg to the President and the Prime Minister?

TRUMAN: Certainly, and the invitation to the Poles to appear before the Foreign Secretaries has gone out.

Should we discuss the communiqué before it leaks out?

STALIN: Yes.

CHURCHILL: It is breaking the principle we have followed.

STALIN: It is agreeable to me one way or the other.

TRUMAN: We will drop it.

767.68119/7-545

Proposal by the Soviet Delegation

[Babelsberg], 7/22/45
[Translation?]
Top secret

The Black Sea Straits

With regard to the regime of the Black Sea Straits, the Conference found necessary that:

  1. The International Straits Convention signed in Montreux shall be abrogated in the proper regular procedure as it no longer corresponds to the present time conditions.

  2. The determination of the regime of the Straits – the only sea passage from and to the Black Sea – shall fall within the province of Turkey and the Soviet Union as the states chiefly concerned and capable of ensuring the freedom of commercial navigation and the security in the Black Sea Straits.

  3. In addition to other measures the new Straits regime should also provide for the following:

In the interests of their own security and maintenance of peace in the area of [the] Black Sea[,] Turkey and the Soviet Union shall prevent by their common facilities in the Straits the use of the Straits by the other countries for the purposes inimical to the Black Sea powers (in addition to Turkish military bases the establishment of Soviet military bases in the Straits).

First meeting of the Subcommittee on Implementation of the Yalta Declaration on Liberated Europe, evening

Present
United States United Kingdom Soviet Union
Mr. Cannon Mr. Gromyko
Mr. Golunsky
740.00119 (Potsdam)/7-2245

The First Secretary of Embassy in Portugal to the Assistant Secretary of State

Potsdam, July 22, 1945

Memorandum for Mr. Dunn

The subcommittee to consider sections 2 and 3 of the document “Implementation of the Yalta Declaration on Liberated Europe” met this evening (July 22). Ambassador Gromyko and Mr. Golunko represented the Soviet Government.

They said that they were not prepared to discuss point 3 because, as Mr. Molotov had agreed, a Soviet paper concerning the recent changes in procedure for the Allied Control Commissions in Rumania, Bulgaria and Hungary will be circulated tomorrow morning, but it was not yet ready this evening, and it of course must be taken into account in considering this subject.

It was accordingly agreed that we would work on point 2 but submit no report to the meeting of the Foreign Ministers until we had also considered point 3 in subcommittee. On point 2 the Soviet Delegation presented a revision reading as follows:

The three Governments agree that in view of the cessation of hostilities in Europe measures can now be adopted to facilitate the entry of representatives of the world press and radio into liberated or former Axis satellite states, and their freedom of movement, and the dispatch of their reports without political censorship or other restrictions than those which result from the security requirements of the occupying forces in those countries which are under the regime of occupation.

In the discussion which followed they receded even from this text and when the meeting closed they left as points of difference the use of the word “entry”, and the specification of “political censorship”. In other words, they hoped not to specify in the text that there were difficulties about entry, on the argument that the other facilities would imply admission, and they wished not to “dot the i’s” of political censorship. They agreed that we would report to our several Ministers that these words need to be worked over in our next session.

They also objected to the last four lines on the first page of our text as mimeographed, to which ad referendum I tentatively agreed, as did the British representative, since this part of the text is not of great substance.

Far more important and the matter which will probably need to be discussed around the Foreign Ministers table is the final provision of Article 2 (see top of page 2 in our text), which applies to domestic freedom of the press in the several countries. They advanced various specious arguments about interference with the sovereignty of other states, and about the authority of the Control Commissions in the satellites, proposing that anything along this line should be handled by a directive to the Control Commissions.

I said that this was a provision to which the American Government attaches great importance, and while for administrative reasons it would probably be necessary in any case to send a directive to the ACCs, it would also be necessary to make some reference to freedom of the press in whatever might publicly be said at the conclusion of the Conference, if the matter is taken up at all. I drew their attention particularly to the phrase “the three Governments express their desire to see removed”, as largely answering the arguments which they had presented.

They asseverated that they had not discussed this question with their top people and the best we could get out of them was an agreement that each of us should report on the details of this meeting to our respective Ministers and receive instructions for the next meeting, which will probably be held after the morning session tomorrow.

The Pittsburgh Press (July 22, 1945)

Big Three nears decision stage at conference

Political, economic problems up first
By Merriman Smith, United Press staff writer

Winant snubbed by Big Three parley

By William H. Stoneman

Editorial: America speaks

Youngstown Vindicator (July 22, 1945)

Jap says Truman to ease up on unconditional surrender

Werner: Potsdam parley sets stage for Russia’s part in knockout of Japs

Soviet may help liquidate foe to assure role in Asia
By Max Werner

U.S. State Department (July 22, 1945)

Log of the President’s Trip to the Berlin Conference

Sunday, July 22:

The President, accompanied by his Military and Naval Aides and Captain McMahon, and Colonel Tiernan, attended Protestant church services at 1000. The services were held in the Coliseum building (a former film laboratory) in the “Masterwork” area of the American Army camp and were conducted by Lieut. Colonel Lawrence Nelson, Second Armored Division Chaplain. Captain Ernest M. Northern Jr., 67th Armored Regiment Chaplain, assisted Colonel Nelson. The President returned to the Coliseum at 1130 to attend a Catholic Mass conducted by his old friend, Colonel Tiernan.

Prime Minister Churchill called on the President at 1215. They conferred for a full hour, and Mr. Churchill left the Little White House at 1330. The Prime Minister declined the President’s invitation to lunch as he, himself, was having guests for lunch.

1500: Mail was dispatched to Washington.

1645: The President and his party left the Little White House for Cecilienhof where he arrived at 1655.

1700: The sixth meeting of the conference was called to order. The meeting adjourned at 1950 and the President and party returned to the Little White House immediately.

2030: Private John R. Thomas Jr., USA (Captain McMahon’s nephew) was a dinner guest at the Little White House this evening. Music was furnished during and after dinner by the Headquarters Berlin District (U.S. Army) Band, playing from the lower White House lawn.

Salzburger Nachrichten (July 23, 1945)

Deutschland – Hauptproblem der Dreierkonferenz

U.S. State Department (July 23, 1945)

Meeting of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 9:30 a.m.

JCS 201st Meeting

Present
Fleet Admiral Leahy Brigadier General Jamison
General of the Army Marshall Brigadier General Lincoln
Fleet Admiral King Brigadier General Esposito
General of the Army Arnold Captain McDill
General Somervell Captain Stroop
Lieutenant General Hull Captain Oster
Vice Admiral Cooke Colonel Peck
Rear Admiral Flanigan Colonel Dean
Rear Admiral Gardner Colonel Donnelly
Major General Gross Colonel Stone
Major General Norstad Colonel Cary
Brigadier General Cabell Colonel Cary
Secretariat
Brigadier General McFarland Captain Moore

JCS Minutes

Potsdam, July 23, 1945, 9:30 a.m.
[Extracts]
Top secret

. . . . . . .

Command in Indo-China (CCS 890/3)

ADMIRAL KING read a memorandum relating to the approach by the United States and British Governments to Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek in regard to the reallocation of the southern part of Indo-China to the Southeast Asia area.

GENERAL MARSHALL proposed the amendment of the statement in paragraph 3 of CCS 890/3 which the British had recommended for inclusion in the final report to the President and the Prime Minister.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff: Approved the amendment to paragraph 3 of CCS 890/3 proposed by General Marshall and directed that it be presented to the Combined Chiefs of Staff.

Provision of Personnel Shipping for the Requirements of Allied Governments (CCS 897)

The Joint Chiefs of Staff: Agreed to recommend that the Combined Chiefs of Staff approve the recommendation of the Combined Military Transportation Committee in paragraph 5b of CCS 897 subject to the amendment of Enclosure “A” as follows:

a. Substitute in paragraph 3c “when satisfactory arrangements in regard to the movement of civilians cannot be” in lieu of “as regards the movement of civilians for which provision is not.”

b. In paragraph 5 delete the words “statement of.”

***Report to the President and Prime Minister (CCS 900)

The Joint Chiefs of Staff considered CCS 900 and amended it in several particulars.

ADMIRAL KING stated that he considered that the United States Chiefs of Staff should insist on the inclusion under Section III of the numbered paragraphs now omitted from the final report to the President and Prime Minister, since the report should be complete and since the substitutes for these paragraphs dealing with rehabilitation did not come under the purview of the Combined Chiefs of Staff.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff:
a. Agreed to recommend approval by the Combined Chiefs of Staff of the final report to the President and Prime Minister in the Enclosure to CCS 900 as amended during the discussion.

b. Agreed to recommend the inclusion under Section III of CCS 900 of appropriate paragraphs as set forth by the United States Chiefs of Staff in the Enclosure to CCS 877/5.

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

Policy in Regard to Lend-Lease Assignments

GENERAL MARSHALL asked Admiral Leahy if he had discussed with the President the question of Lend-Lease assignments to the United Nations.

ADMIRAL LEAHY said that he had discussed the question with the President and was trying to get him to change the basic directive on Lend-Lease to permit General Eisenhower to continue his present course of action. He believed that the President would approve the delivery of maintenance supplies to occupational forces in Europe but that he would not approve the delivery of arms and ammunition.

GENERAL SOMERVELL said that he had proposed three policies which might be approved by the President, as follows:

  1. The support of that portion of the forces of such nations as in the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff will be profitably employed against Japan in furtherance of our agreed strategy or for such other purposes connected with the war against Japan as may be approved by the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

  2. Supply of maintenance items for United States equipment now in possession of Allied Armies of occupation.

  3. Such exceptional military programs as the Joint Chiefs of Staff consider necessary for the successful prosecution of the war.

GENERAL SOMERVELL said that if the President would approve these three policies as a substitute for the policy he had announced on 5 July 1945, the Chief of Staff of the Army could then issue specific directives for assignment of Lend-Lease to the countries concerned which would accord with the three policies established by the President. He said we are receiving demands from the British for maintenance supplies and that some means of providing them is necessary. He felt that some decision must be reached promptly in regard to the delivery of maintenance supplies in order that the production problem might be controlled.

ADMIRAL LEAHY said that he recognized that this problem must be settled and that perhaps some basis for barter with the British might be found. Possibly the supply of United States material against reimbursement as provided for in Section 3c of the Lend-Lease Act would be the solution.

Memorandum by the British Chiefs of Staff

[Babelsberg,] 22 July 1945
Top secret
CCS 890/3

Command in Indo-China

  1. We agree that as a first step in reorganising command in Indo-China, there is advantage in dividing the country into two, leaving the northern portion in China Theatre and allotting the southern portion to Southeast Asia Command. This organisation of command should be subject to review in the light of the development of operations in that area.

  2. We have examined the run of communications in Indo-China and suggest that the most satisfactory dividing line would be latitude 16° N.

  3. We, therefore, recommend that the Combined Chiefs of Staff should include in their final report to the Prime Minister and President, a statement on the following lines:

    We consider it important that there shall be unity of control of major operations in the Indo-China-Siam area when they develop and of previous subversive and para-military operations. As the first step in securing this unity of control, we are agreed that the best arrangement would be to include that portion of Indo-China lying south of latitude 16° North in Southeast Asia Command. This arrangement would continue General Wedemeyer’s control of that part of Indo-China which covers the flank of projected Chinese operations in China, and would enable Admiral Mountbatten to prepare the ground in the southern half of Indo-China where any initial operations by him would develop.

    We recommend that the President and the Prime Minister should approach the Generalissimo to secure his agreement to this arrangement.

Byrnes-Molotov meeting, 10:30 a.m.

Present
United States Soviet Union
Secretary Byrnes Foreign Commissar Molotov
Mr. Bohlen Mr. Pavlov

Bohlen Minutes

Potsdam, July 23, 1945, 9:30 a.m.
Top secret

THE SECRETARY said he had asked to see Mr. Molotov because he was deeply concerned at the development of the question of reparation from Germany. He said that as Mr. Molotov knew the United States Government had always favored and still favored the adoption of a friendly overall policy for the Three Powers which would treat Germany as an economic whole. He said, however, after listening to the discussions here and hearing the report of the Reparations Committee he did not see how certain of the positions taken by the Soviet Government could be reconciled by [with?] the adoption of an overall reparation plan. For example, the question of the transfer now to Polish administration of a large part of 1937 Germany would expose the British and Americans in their zones to serious dangers in connection with an overall reparation plan. Another factor which worked against the overall plan was the definition put in by Mr. Maisky of “war bounty [booty?]”. The Secretary said he wished to make it very plain that the United States did not intend to pay out money to finance imports to Germany and thus repeat the experience after the last war when in fact United States funds had been used to pay reparations to others.

MR. MOLOTOV said he fully understood that point of view and he wished to say that Mr. Maisky had not fully made clear the position of the Soviet Government on the definition of “war bounty [booty?].”

THE SECRETARY continued that he was also very much afraid that the attempt to resolve these conditions in practice would lead to endless quarrels and disagreements between the three countries at a time when unity between them was essential.

MR. MOLOTOV said he thought that these difficulties could be reconciled here at the Conference and that he intended to put forward at the morning meeting of the Foreign Ministers concrete proposals which he hoped would be carefully studied by the British and American Delegations.

THE SECRETARY said that under the circumstances he wondered whether it would not be better to give consideration to the possibility of each country taking reparations from its own zone. For example, according to their estimates, about 50% of the existing wealth of Germany was in the Soviet zone and that, therefore, the Soviet Union could receive its share of reparations from its own zone. He added that if they wished to obtain certain equipment or materials from the British or American zones they could do so in exchange for food or coal needed to feed and warm the German population in the west. He added that Marshal Stalin had indicated some such proposal when he had said yesterday that if the British wished to obtain coal from Silesia they could do so by exchanging other goods with the Poles. He added that his suggestion for zonal as against overall treatment applied only to reparations but that in other matters, such as currency, transport, etc. Germany would be treated as an economic whole.

MR. MOLOTOV said he knew that the Marshal strongly favored an overall plan for reparations and he said that they would be quite prepared to consider reducing their reparation claims.

As it was then time for the meeting, it was agreed that if agreeable with Mr. Eden the three Foreign Secretaries would meet informally this afternoon in order to discuss the matter further.

In conclusion, THE SECRETARY repeated that the United States could not agree to anything which would require them to finance the feeding of Germans in their zone so that the latter could work on behalf of reparations for other countries.

Byrnes-Eden conversation

Present
United States United Kingdom
Secretary Byrnes Foreign Secretary Eden

Byrnes expressed the views of the United States on the subject of reparations from Germany to Molotov and had subsequently informed Eden of this talk.

Byrnes-Churchill conversation, morning

Present
United States United Kingdom
Secretary Byrnes Prime Minister Churchill

Churchill: “Mr. Byrnes told me this morning that he had cabled to T. V. Soong advising him not to give way on any point to the Russians, but to return to Moscow and keep on negotiating pending further developments.

“It is quite clear that the United States do not at the present time desire Russian participation in the war against Japan.”