EUR Files
The Assistant Secretary of State (MacLeish) to the Assistant Secretary of State (Dunn)
About the draft we discussed over the phone this noon.1
It seems to me the communiqué might well begin with a restatement of Allied war aims, in which it would be declared that our purpose was not the destruction of a nation or of a people, but the destruction of the military might of our enemies and preventive measures which would assure the world that our enemies would not be able to renew their threat to the peace of the world. These objectives will be attained by the unconditional surrender of the German armies, the disbanding of those armies, the destruction or removal of military equipment, the neutralization, so far as military production is concerned, of German industry, the punishment of war criminals, and the termination of the propaganda of international hatred and of racial superiority to which the German people had been subjected. This list of the measures to be taken is, of course, incomplete. I put it here merely to suggest the desirability of restating the unconditional surrender principle in a context which will make its meaning clear— viz, the fact that unconditional surrender is a means to obtain the liquidation of the German military menace rather than a means to destroy the German nation or its people. This can best be done, in my opinion, by an affirmative statement rather than a negative statement.
The communiqué would then go on to state the Allied peace aims, putting first among those aims the completion of the world organization discussed at Dumbarton Oaks, but referring, at the same time, to the negotiation of bilateral agreements, such as were contemplated in and by the Dumbarton Oaks conversations. This part of the communiqué should reaffirm, in the most emphatic language possible, the purpose of the Allies, not merely to win a peace, but to create one—and, above all, their purpose to create the peace in terms of international organization. The references to international organization should not be limited to the security organization only, but much should be made of the intention to remove the causes of war in the economic and social field and to improve the lot of humanity through advances in education, in health, in food, etc., in living standards generally, etc. etc. This part of the communiqué would gain great strength if it included an announcement of the date of the next [Page 428] United Nations meeting for the purpose of the continuation of the conversations begun at Dumbarton Oaks.
The point should be made that actions taken with reference to Germany will be taken by the three principal belligerents in their capacity as nations allied for the prosecution of the war, whereas the creation of the peace will be the work of the three allied powers acting in concert with the United Nations.
A third part of the communiqué would deal with the policy of the Allies toward liberated areas. It would be a blessing to the world if we could walk straight up to this question. If the Allies are agreed on the two points which have been repeatedly made by the President and the Secretary of State, and if the two points could be stated in conjunction, it would go far to clear up one of the most potentially dangerous spots in the whole public opinion picture. The two points are, first, that the peoples of the liberated areas are to have an opportunity, when conditions permit them to express their will, to decide for themselves what kind of government they want; second, that they can have any kind of government they want, so long as it is not a government, the existence of which would endanger the peace of the world—and a fascist government, in our opinion, does endanger the peace of the world by its mere existence.