Foreign Relations of the United States Diplomatic Papers, 1940, The British Commonwealth, The Soviet Union, The Near East and Africa, Volume III

711.61/749

Memorandum of Conversation, by the Acting Secretary of State

[Washington,] July 27, 1940.

The Soviet Ambassador called to see me this morning at my request. I handed the Ambassador a copy of the President’s proclamation of regulations covering the export of petroleum products, tetraethyl lead and its derivatives, and iron and steel scrap,⁴¹ and stated to the Ambassador that these regulations had been issued solely because of our national defense requirements and that they were general in character and applied equally to all nations without any discrimination against any particular nation or nations.

The Ambassador was evidently fully informed of the contents of these documents before he came to see me, since he merely stated that the Soviet Government was not interested in the products mentioned and that the effects of the proclamation would have no prejudicial effect upon Soviet interests.

The Ambassador then commenced the same type of statement which he has recently made to the Secretary of State and to other officials of the Department regarding the policies pursued by this Government towards the Soviet. He said that as a result of the proclamation and regulations issued by the President on July 2,⁴² the Amtorg Corporation had made application for over a thousand export licenses and that as yet not a single one of these licenses had been granted. He stated that the most urgent requirement of Russia was machine tools and that machine tools which had been manufactured for the Soviet within the United States could not possibly be utilized in the American rearmament program since they were entirely different from machine tools utilized in the United States and even the measurements were metrical and, consequently, not usable in American factories. The Ambassador stated furthermore that while the United States was refusing to issue licenses for exports to Soviet Russia, it was granting licenses for the export of exactly the same products to other belligerent countries.

I stated to the Ambassador that the question of what was or was not required in our own national defense interests was a matter to be determined solely by the competent authorities of this government and not by the representative of a foreign government. I stated that the Ambassador was fully familiar with the policy of the United States, namely, that it intended to afford every possible assistance to the British Government short of war and that if the Ambassador was complaining of the fact that export licenses had been granted by American authorities to the British authorities, that was clearly a matter to be determined upon by the government of the United States and was not open to question. I added, however, that within the limits of the policy of the United States, one feature of which I had already mentioned and another feature of which was an unwillingness to approve exports of materials which could assist governments indulging in the practice of bombing civilian populations from the air, I had been informed by the officials of the Department who were in close contact with these questions that there had been no discrimination whatever against the Soviet Government and that whatever action might have been taken or might in the future be taken in the way of refusing licenses for exports to Russia, I could assure the Ambassador that such determinations would be controlled solely by what was regarded here as our own national defense requirements.

I stated that I was likewise informed, however, that there were innumerable incidents of discrimination against American nationals by the Soviet government and that I was under the belief that these incidents had been brought to the attention of the Ambassador. The Ambassador said that certain attempts had been made to show discrimination against American nationals but that he had never yet learned of any proven case.

I said that since that was the situation according to the Ambassador, it seemed to me that it might serve a useful purpose for the Ambassador and myself to sit down in the near future and to take up the complaints which he desired to make and the incidents regarding which we believed we had a valid ground for complaint, in order that we might thresh the whole question out. I stated that it seemed to me regrettable in the present moment of the world’s history for two great powers like the United States and Russia to have their relations constantly deteriorating. I said it seemed to me it would be far more constructive and in the better interests of the peoples of the two countries for an effort to be made by both sides, including the Ambassador himself, not to spend their time complaining and finding causes of contention, but rather in a friendly spirit to try and solve the alleged grievances which both sides might possess in order that the efforts of the two countries might be directed towards a rehabilitation of world order and legitimate trade at a time when anarchy seemed about to engulf the entire civilized world.

The Ambassador said that he was very much relieved to hear the statement that I had made and that he himself believed that such an objective would be in the highest interests of the two countries.

The Ambassador then said that he would like to divest himself of his official role for a few minutes and speak to me personally. I said I would be very glad to have him do so. He then stated that the official statement which I had issued three days before regarding the action taken by the Soviet against the three Baltic republics⁴³ had heightened ill-feeling against the United States in Soviet Russia and had been regarded as most offensive by his Government, and had not given an accurate statement of the facts. The Ambassador went on to say that the action taken by the Soviet should have been applauded by the United States since it had obliterated the growth of “fascism” in the three Baltic republics and had made it possible for the suffering peoples of those three nations to come under the sheltering protection of the Soviet Government as a result of which they would obtain the blessings of liberal and social government.

I stated that the statement which I had issued represented the official view of the government of the United States and that it was impossible for me to discuss the matter with the Ambassador. I said that the policy of this government was known throughout the world, that it opposed the use of force and the domination of free and independent peoples, and that so long as this Administration continued, it would not fail to raise its voice in protest against acts of aggression of this character.

The Ambassador interjected to say that it seemed to him that I was placing the freely expressed will of the Baltic peoples to come under Russian domination on a par with the military invasion and occupation by Germany of the small Western European nations.

I said that I had made it clear in the statement to which the Ambassador referred that we saw no difference in principle between the two cases. I further said that there was no useful purpose to be served by continuing a discussion of this matter and that it would be well for the Ambassador and myself to regard the question as one upon which we agreed to disagree.

I then said that it had been a matter of great regret to this government that after a period of 20 years, during which the Soviet Government had time and again reiterated its desire to maintain the cause of world peace, to uphold the principle of the right of free and independent peoples to have their independence and territorial integrity held inviolate, to see that the Soviet government during the past year had apparently departed completely from its former policy. I said that I need not detail the events of the past year since the Ambassador was as fully familiar with this page of history as I was. I stated that it seemed to me, however, that in the months and the years to come there undoubtedly would arise many dangers which would affect the Soviet Union and that I believe this situation was obvious. I remarked that it seemed to me that the Soviet Union would appear logically to desire to obtain more friendly relations with a government like the United States from which it never had and never would have anything to fear, rather than to pursue a policy which necessarily must result in a deterioration of the relations between the United States and Russia.

The Ambassador replied that he was completely in accord. He wished, however, to advance two considerations in this connection:

He said, first, that trade between the United States and Russia today had fallen to the zero point and that he believed that in order to accomplish what he himself greatly desired, namely, the objective I had just mentioned, a practical basis must be laid down so that a reasonable volume of trade between the two countries might exist.

Second, he said, conversations between the two governments looking towards an improvement in relations, to be fruitful, must take place independently of the policy of either of the two governments with regard to third powers.

I replied immediately that I was entirely in accord with what the Ambassador said and that I would be very glad to engage in further conversations with him on the basis which he had proposed, although I interpreted his remarks to mean, when he said that such discussions as might take place must be independent of the relations of each of the two governments with third powers, that the discussions would be such as not to conflict with the established policy of this government with regard to its moral and material support of Great Britain. The Ambassador assented to this interpretation.

I said before concluding the conversation that I should remind the Ambassador once more of all of the efforts which the present government of the United States had made over a period of seven years, from the time when Mr. Litvinov visited Washington, to establish friendly relations with the Soviet government. I said I need hardly remind the Ambassador that from our point of view the assurances contained in the Litvinov agreement had not been carried out by the Russian government and that I feared that no satisfactory result would be obtained from the discussions which we had in mind unless both parties to these discussions were assured that confidence could be obtained on both sides as to the good faith and the good will of the other party to the conversations.

I said to the Ambassador that I would ask him to come to see me again the latter part of next week and at that time I would be glad to review with him some of the precise questions which he desired to bring up and which we ourselves desired to raise.

S[umner] W[elles]

41. Proclamation No. 2417, issued by the President on July 26, 1940, Department of State Bulletin, July 27, 1940, p. 49. For further limitations on additional material subject to export license, see the following proclamations issued by the President: No. 2423 of September 12, ibid., September 14, 1940, p. 213; No. 2428 of September 30, ibid., October 5, 1940, p. 279; No. 2449 of December 10, ibid., December 14, 1940, p. 529; No. 2451 of December 20, ibid., December 21, 1940, p. 559.
42. See footnote 25, p. 311.
43. Statement of July 23 regarding the independence and territorial integrity of the Baltic Republics; for text, see vol. i, p. 401, or Department of State Bulletin, July 27, 1940, p. 48.