121.5460D/88
Memorandum of Conversation, by Mr. L. Randolph Higgs of the Division of European Affairs
I was called into Mr. Atherton’s office this afternoon to participate in a conversation already under way between him and the Finnish Minister. Mr. Atherton remarked that the Minister had raised the question of actions of the Finnish Government against the personnel of our Legation in Helsinki and that he had told the Minister about the refusal of Marshal Mannerheim to receive Colonel Huthsteiner, our Military Attaché in Helsinki, before the latter’s departure from Finland for the United States,35 and about the pressure being brought to bear on Finns to sever their association and other connections with our Legation personnel in Helsinki. Mr. Atherton asked me whether I had any other information along those lines to give the Minister.
I said that I could add a few details to the matter relating to the departure of our Military Attaché and recited the refusal of the Field Marshal to receive Colonel Huthsteiner after the latter had been given to understand before departing for his tour of the front that he would be so received. I said that it was our understanding that the Marshal was stated to have taken the position that he would no longer receive “neutral Attachés,” but that we were unable to understand this report in view of another report that the Swedish Military Attaché36 who was likewise being transferred from Finland had been received by the Marshal.
I then told to the Minister what I had previously stated to him: that is, that I saw little purpose in our trying to debate the pros and cons of various actions of this kind, since it would take up too much time and really do nothing to solve the basic difficulties which were the [Page 86] cause of these incidents. The Minister objected that one of the purposes in his being here was to smooth out such difficulties.
At this point the Secretary called for Mr. Atherton to come to his office and I was left alone with the Minister.
The Minister then stated that he could not agree with me entirely as to the basic attitude of the Finnish Government toward the United States at this time. He described that attitude as friendly and as indicating a strong desire on the part of all Finns to maintain relations with the United States. I replied that I could agree with him to the extent that there probably was wide-spread desire in Finland to maintain relations with the United States. I said that it was my personal opinion, however, that the considerations involved in maintaining relations with the United States were secondary in the mind of the Finnish Government to those involved in its policy toward the Soviet Union and toward Germany. I went on to say I felt that if the Finnish Government thought it necessary to achieve the aims involved in its policy toward the Soviet Union and toward Germany, it would readily forego the considerations of advantage to it involved in maintaining relations with us. The Minister said that he could agree with this view with the modification that friendly feelings toward the United States were stronger than I seemed to feel.
The Minister said that he wanted to illustrate the latter point. He then opened his brief case and pulled out a document which he said was a draft of a Christmas message which he intended to send to Finnish language newspapers in the United States this year in accordance with his usual custom. He said that as a matter of courtesy he would like to give me a copy of that message. I interrupted him to say that I would want to make it clear in accepting the copy that such acceptance did not imply either approval or disapproval of his message. He said that of course he understood, and that he would never submit voluntarily to censorship of such statements and that he was only giving me a copy of the message as a courtesy.
He then reverted to his previous statement about Finnish friendship for the United States and said he wanted to read me a passage in his message. The passage which he read me was to the effect that outside of the Scandinavian countries Finland had a greater friendship for the United States than any other country. I asked him how he thought such a statement would be received in Helsinki at the present time. He was much taken aback by this question and said he hadn’t thought of it. He folded his paper and dropped the subject.
The conversation lasted for a few minutes longer along lines previously taken and much discussed between him and the Department on a number of other occasions.
[Page 87]As he got up to leave, I reminded him that he had not left with me the copy of his message mentioned above which I said I thought he had forgotten about. He replied that he would not give me that copy, but would send me a “clean copy.” (It was obvious that he intended to revise his “message” in the light of my remarks, an action which clearly demonstrates how “free” Finland is at this time of “foreign pressures”.)