740.0011 Moscow/340

Protocol, Signed at Moscow, November 1, 1943

Secret Protocol

of the Conference attended by the Secretary of State of the United States of America, Mr. Cordell Hull, the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs of the United Kingdom, Mr. Anthony Eden, and the People’s Commissar of Foreign Affairs of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, V. M. Molotov, which was held in Moscow from the 19th to the 30th October, 1943.

[Page 750]

The following took part in the Conference:

  • U.S.A.
    • Mr. Harriman
    • Major General Deane
    • Mr. Hackworth
    • Mr. Dunn
    • Mr. Bohlenand experts
  • U.K.
    • Sir A. Clark Kerr
    • Mr. Strang
    • Lieutenant General Sir Hastings Ismay
    • Mr. Wilsonand experts
    • Soviet Union
    • Marshal Voroshilov
    • Mr. Vyshinski
    • Mr. Litvinov
    • Mr. Sergeyev
    • Major General Gryzlov
    • Mr. Saksin
    • and experts

[Page 751][Page 755]
1. Consideration of measures to shorten the duration of the war against Hitlerite Germany and her Allies in Europe.
(Proposed by U.S.S.R.)
See the Most Secret Protocol of the Conference.12
2. (a) Four-Nations Declaration concerning general security.
(Proposed by U.S.A.)
(a) The text of a declaration was agreed. The Declaration was signed on October 30th. (see annex 1).
(b) The establishment of a Commission of the three Powers.
(Proposed by U.S.S.R.)
(b) It was recognised as desirable that representatives of the United States of America, the United Kingdom and the Soviet Union should conduct, in a preliminary fashion, an exchange of views on questions connected with the establishment of an international organisation for the maintenance of international peace and security, the intention being that this work should be carried out in the first instance in Washington, and also in London and Moscow.12a
3. The setting up of machinery for dealing with questions requiring current and close collaboration, with particular reference to the functions and scope of the Politico-Military Commission in Algiers.
(Proposed by U.K.)
(a) It was decided to set up a European Advisory Commission in London (see annex 2).
(b) It was decided to set up an Advisory Council for Italy (see annex 3).
4. Exchange of views on the situation in Italy and the Balkans.
(Proposed by U.K.)
(a) Information about the position in Italy and the Balkans. (a) A written and oral exchange of information took place.
(b) Proposal of the U.S.S.R. about policy in regard to Italy. (b) The text of a declaration was adopted (see annex 4).
(c) Proposal of the Soviet Government as regards the transfer to the Soviet Union of part of the Italian Navy (one battleship, one cruiser, eight destroyers, four submarines) and of the Merchant Fleet (to a total of 40,000 tons) which was at the disposal of the Anglo-American forces as a result of the capitulation of Italy. (c) Mr. Eden and Mr. Hull did not raise any objection to the proposal of the Soviet Government but reserved their final answer.
5. Methods of dealing with current political and economic issues and those which may arise as the war progresses.
(Proposed by U.S.A.)
See the (decision under point 3(a).
6. Attitude towards the French Committee with special reference to its position in Metropolitan France and the establishment of eventual French government.
(Proposed by U.K.)
An exchange of views took place upon the document presented to the Conference by the Governments of the U.S.A. and the U.K.: “Basic scheme for Administration of liberated France” (see annex 5).*
In connection with questions put by the Soviet Delegation and observations made by them, the [Page 752] document in question was referred for examination to the European Advisory Commission.
7. A. Treatment of Germany and other enemy countries in Europe. An exchange of views took place, which showed identity of view on the main questions.
(a) International military, political, and economic control over Germany during the armistice period. The question was referred for detailed study to the European Advisory Commission.
(b) Steps toward ultimate settlement of future status of German Government, frontiers and other questions, length of armistice period.
(Proposed by U.S.A.)
B. Agreement in principle in regard to treatment of Germany and other enemy countries in Europe.
(a) During the armistice period, e.g. control commission, etc.
(b) At peace settlement, e.g. frontiers, military occupation, disarmament, reparations, decentralization of the German Government etc. (Austria)
(Proposed by U.K.)
(b) The text of a declaration about Austria was adopted (see annex 6).
8. Question of agreements between the major and minor Allies on post-war questions.
(Proposed by U.K.)
An exchange of views took place. Note was taken of Mr. Eden’s statement that he had no objection to the conclusion of the Soviet-Czechoslovak Treaty, the draft of which had been communicated to him.
9. Common policy towards Turkey.
(Proposed by U.K.)
The question was considered in the discussion on point 1.
10. Common policy in Persia.
(Proposed by U.K.)
The following proposal, which was worked out by a committee appointed by the Conference, was accepted: “(a) After an exchange of views, the Committee detects no fundamental difference in the policy towards Iran of any [Page 753] of the three Governments; (b) the Committee was unable to reach agreement on the expediency of making any immediate declaration or declarations with regard to Iran; and (c) the issue of such a declaration or declarations might be further considered by the representatives of the three Governments in Tehran, with a view to the three Governments coming to a decision about the expediency of issuing such a declaration or declarations after the signature of the proposed Irano - American Agreement13 and after appropriate consultation with the Government of Iran.”
11. Relations between the U.S.S.R. and Poland and policy in relation to Poland generally.
(Proposed by U.K.)
An exchange of views took place.
12. Future of Poland and Danubian and Balkan countries, including the question of confederations.
(Proposed by U.K.)
An exchange of views took place. Note was taken of the statement of the Soviet Delegation (see annex 7).
13. Peace feelers from enemy states.
(Proposed by U.K.)
An exchange of views took place. The following resolution was adopted on the line to be taken in the event of peace-feelers being received from enemy countries:
“The Governments of the United Kingdom, the United States of America and the Soviet Union agree to inform each other immediately of any peace-feelers which they may receive from the Government of, or from any groups or individuals in, a country with which any one of the [Page 754] three countries is at war. The three Governments further agree to consult together with a view to concerting their action in regard to such approaches.”13a
14. Policy regarding Allied territory liberated through the advance of the Allied forces.
(Proposed by U.K.)
An exchange of views took place. The question was referred to the European Advisory Commission.
15. A. Post-war economic cooperation with the U.S.S.R.
(Proposed by U.K.)
It was considered necessary to continue the examination of the questions raised.
B. Economic matters for reconstruction.
(Proposed by U.S.A.)
(a) Cooperation in the rehabilitation of war damage in the U.S.S.R. (a) It was considered desirable to start conversations between the People’s Commissariat for Foreign Affairs and the United States Embassy in Moscow.
(b) Joint action for assistance to other countries. (b) The statement of the United States Secretary of State on paragraph (b) “Joint action for assistance to other countries” is attached to this Protocol (see annex 8).
(c) Collaboration on an international basis dealing with matters such as food and agriculture, transport and communications, finance and trade, and the International Labor Office. (c) The memorandum of the United States Secretary of State on paragraph (c) “Bases of our program for international economic collaboration” is attached to this Protocol (see annex 9).
(d) Questions of reparations. (d) An exchange of views took place in the course of which there was some difference of opinion on some points in the memorandum which had been put forward.
16. Common policy towards resistance movements in Yugoslavia.
(Proposed by U.K.)
This question was removed from the Agenda of the Conference at the suggestion of Mr. Eden.
17. Question of joint responsibility for Europe as against separate areas of responsibility.
(Proposed by U.K.)
This was dealt with under point 12 of the Agenda.
18. Declaration about the responsibility of the Hitlerites for atrocities.
(Proposed by U.K.)
The text of a declaration was adopted (see annex 10).
19. Mutual exchange of military information.
(Proposed by U.K.)
The following resolution was adopted: “It is agreed that in order to ensure that all information regarding the common enemy is available to all the Allies engaged in his destruction, the Allies should keep each other mutually and constantly informed of all technical military information reaching them regarding the German Army, Navy and Air Force, the fighting value of enemy formations and the tactics used.”
20. Publication of Conference documents. It was decided to publish the documents reproduced in annexes 1, 4, 6, and 10 to the present Protocol.
Cordell Hull
V. Molotov
Anthony Eden


Declaration of Four Nations on General Security

The Governments of the United States of America, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union and China;

united in their determination, in accordance with the Declaration by the United Nations of January 1, 1942, and subsequent declarations, to continue hostilities against those Axis powers with which they respectively are at war until such powers have laid down their arms on the basis of unconditional surrender;

conscious of their responsibility to secure the liberation of themselves and the peoples allied with them from the menace of aggression;

[Page 756]

recognizing the necessity of ensuring a rapid and orderly transition from war to peace and of establishing and maintaining international peace and security with the least diversion of the world’s human and economic resources for armaments;

jointly declare:

That their united action, pledged for the prosecution of the war against their respective enemies, will be continued for the organization and maintenance of peace and security.
That those of them at war with a common enemy will act together in all matters relating to the surrender and disarmament of that enemy.
That they will take all measures deemed by them to be necessary to provide against any violation of the terms imposed upon the enemy.
That they recognize the necessity of establishing at the earliest practicable date a general international organization, based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all peace-loving states, and open to membership by all such states, large and small, for the maintenance of international peace and security.
That for the purposes of maintaining international peace and security pending the reestablishment of law and order and the inauguration of a system of general security, they will consult with one another and as occasion requires with other members of the United Nations with a view to joint action on behalf of the community of nations.
That after the termination of hostilities they will not employ their military forces within the territories of other states except for the purposes envisaged in this declaration and after joint consultation.
That they will confer and cooperate with one another and with other members of the United Nations to bring about a practicable general agreement with respect to the regulation of armaments in the post-war period.


European Advisory Commission13b

The Governments of the United Kingdom, United States of America and the Soviet Union agree to establish a European Advisory Commission composed of representatives of the three Powers. The Commission will have its seat in London and will meet as soon as possible. The presidency will be held in rotation by the representatives [Page 757] of the three Powers. A joint secretariat will be established. The representatives may be assisted where necessary by technical advisers, civilian and military.
The Commission will study and make joint recommendations to the three Governments upon European questions connected with the termination of hostilities which the three Governments may consider appropriate to refer to it. For this purpose the members of the Commission will be supplied by their Governments with all relevant information on political and military developments affecting their work.
As one of the Commission’s first tasks the three Governments desire that it shall as soon as possible make detailed recommendations to them upon the terms of surrender to be imposed upon each of the European states with which any of the three Powers are at war, and upon the machinery required to ensure the fulfillment of those terms. The Commission will take into account, as part of the material for its study of these matters, the memorandum of July 1st,14 circulated by the United Kingdom Government to the Governments of the United States of America and the Soviet Union, regarding the principles which should govern the conclusion of hostilities with European enemy States. The Commission will also take account of the experience already gained in the imposition and enforcement of unconditional surrender upon Italy.15
Representatives of the Governments of other United Nations will, at the discretion of the Commission, be invited to take part in meetings of the Commission when matters especially affecting their interests are under discussion.
The foregoing terms of reference will be subject to review by the three Governments if circumstances should arise which call for an extension of the membership and competence of the Commission.
The establishment of the Commission will not preclude other methods of consultation on current or other issues which the three Governments think it desirable to discuss. There may for example be questions calling for special consideration. These questions may be handled by tripartite discussions in one or other of the three capitals (Washington, London, or Moscow, as may be found most convenient) between the head of the Foreign Ministry and the permanent diplomatic representatives of the other two Governments.
There may also be questions calling for international or special tripartite conferences.
[Page 758]


Advisory Council for Italy

An Advisory Council for Italy will be established forthwith, composed in the first instance of Representatives of the United Kingdom, the United States of America, the Soviet Union and the French Committee of National Liberation. Representatives of Greece and Yugoslavia will be added as full members of the Council as soon as practicable, in view of the special interests of these two countries arising from the aggressions of Fascist Italy upon their territory during the present war.
Each Representative will be assisted, where necessary, by a small staff of technical advisers, civilian and military. The Council will establish itself as soon as possible in Italy at the same place as the Headquarters of the Allied Commander-in-Chief.
The Council will keep itself closely informed of current Italian affairs and advise the respective Governments and the French Committee of National Liberation in regard to problems relating to Italy, other than military operational questions. The members of the Council will be supplied by the respective Governments and by the French Committee of National Liberation with all relevant information on political and military developments affecting their work. They will make joint or several recommendations to their Governments or to the French Committee, but will not have power to take final decisions. They will not, of course, concern themselves with the military functions of the Allied Commander-in-Chief.
The Council will have the duty in particular of watching the operation of the machinery of control in Italy which will be enforcing the terms of surrender.
The Council will advise the Allied Commander-in-Chief in his capacity as President of the Allied Control Commission on general policy connected with the work of control. For this purpose it will maintain close touch with the Allied Commander-in-Chief as President of the Control Commission and will have the right to ask him for information or explanations on matters affecting the Council’s work. It will maintain close touch with such other technical inter-Allied bodies as may be established in Italy and will be entitled to obtain information and explanations from them on matters affecting its work.
The Allied Commander-in-Chief will continue as in the past to receive instructions from the United Kingdom and the United States Governments through the Combined Chiefs of Staff in Washington.
When, in the opinion of the Allied Commander-in-Chief, it is possible to bring direct military control of the Italian administration [Page 759] to an end, the Commander-in-Chief will relinquish the presidency of the Allied Control Commission. The Advisory Council for Italy will thereupon assume the direction of the work of the Allied Control Commission.


Declaration Regarding Italy

The Foreign Secretaries of the United States of America, the United Kingdom and the Soviet Union have established that their three Governments are in complete agreement that Allied policy towards Italy must be based upon the fundamental principle that Fascism and all its evil influences and emanations shall be utterly destroyed and that the Italian people shall be given every opportunity to establish governmental and other institutions based upon democratic principles.

The Foreign Secretaries of the United States of America and the United Kingdom declare that the action of their Governments from the inception of the invasion of Italian territory, in so far as paramount military requirements have permitted, has been based upon this policy.

In the furtherance of this policy in the future the Foreign Secretaries of the three Governments are agreed that the following measures are important and should be put into effect:—

It is essential that the Italian Government should be made more democratic by the introduction of representatives of those sections of the Italian people who have always opposed Fascism.
Freedom of speech, of religious worship, of political belief, of the press and of public meeting shall be restored in full measure to the Italian people, who shall also be entitled to form anti-Fascist political groups.
All institutions and organisations created by the Fascist regime shall be suppressed.
All Fascist or pro-Fascist elements shall be removed from the administration and from the institutions and organizations of a public character.
All political prisoners of the Fascist regime shall be released and accorded a full amnesty.
Democratic organs of local government shall be created.
Fascist chiefs and other persons known or suspected to be war criminals shall be arrested and handed over to justice.

In making this declaration the three Foreign Secretaries recognize that so long as active military operations continue in Italy the time at which it is possible to give full effect to the principles set out above will be determined by the Commander-in-Chief on the basis of instructions [Page 760] received through the Combined Chiefs of Staff. The three Governments parties to this declaration will at the request of any one of them consult on this matter.

It is further understood that nothing in this resolution is to operate against the right of the Italian people ultimately to choose their own form of government.


Civil Affairs for France

The primary purpose of the Allied landing in France will be the defeat of Germany. Subject only to this, it will be the object of the Allied forces to bring about the earliest possible liberation of France from her oppressors, and the creation of conditions in which a democratically constituted French authority may be able to assume the civil administration. The ultimate aim of the Allies is the free and untrammelled choice by the French people of the form of Government under which they wish to live. Meanwhile and until this stage is reached, the largest measure of personal and political liberty compatible with military security shall be restored to the French people. As far as the over-riding interests of military operations allow, there shall be freedom of speech, of opinion, of the press and of correspondence. The French flag shall be used on French public buildings.

With these considerations in mind, the following principles may be laid down as governing the civil administration of liberated French territory on the mainland during the period of hostilities.

In all liberated areas the Supreme Allied Commander must, so long as and in so far as military necessity requires, have supreme authority in order that the prosecution of the war against Germany may continue unhampered.
The civil administration under the Supreme Allied Commander shall, as far as possible, be conducted by French citizens. The Director of Civil Affairs must be a French officer appointed by the Supreme Allied Commander from the French contingent or French Liaison Mission connected with the military operations in France.
The two Governments will inform the French Committee of National Liberation that the Supreme Allied Commander will invite the French military authorities to appoint a military mission on civil affairs to his headquarters. The Supreme Allied Commander shall in the planning of civil affairs consult the French military authorities appointed to assist in this work and give consideration to the policies recommended by them. When operations start, the French Military Liaison Mission shall be associated in the direction of civil affairs.
Military control of civil affairs will be of as short duration as is practicable. The time of termination of military control will be decided by C.C.S.16 on the recommendation of the Supreme Allied Commander.
If circumstances permit, the transfer of civil responsibility to French hands may be progressive.
In order to achieve the eventual aim of free and untrammelled choice by the French people of the form of government under which they wish to live, the Supreme Allied Commander shall do his best to hold the scales even between all French political groups sympathetic to the Allied cause.
One of the first tasks of civil affairs staff of the Supreme Allied Commander on entering French territory will be to establish relations with resistance groups within France and to secure their cooperation in civil matters.
The Supreme Allied Commander shall have no dealings or relations with the Vichy regime except for the purpose of liquidating it. He will not retain or employ in any office any person who has wilfully collaborated with the enemy or who has deliberately acted in a manner hostile to the Allied cause.


Declaration on Austria

The Governments of the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union and the United States of America are agreed that Austria, the first free country to fall a victim to Hitlerite aggression, shall be liberated from German domination.

They regard the annexation imposed upon Austria by Germany on March 15th, 1938,17 as null and void. They consider themselves as in no way bound by any changes effected in Austria since that date. They declare that they wish to see reestablished a free and independent Austria, and thereby to open the way for the Austrian people themselves, as well as those neighboring states which will be faced with similar problems, to find that political and economic security which is the only basis for lasting peace.

Austria is reminded, however, that she has a responsibility which she cannot evade for participation in the war on the side of Hitlerite Germany, and that in the final settlement account will inevitably be taken of her own contribution to her liberation.

[Page 762]


The Future of Poland and Danuubian and Balkan Countries, Including the Question of Federations18

The Soviet Government consider the liberation of small countries and the restoration of their independence and sovereignty as one of the most important tasks in the post-war arrangement of Europe and in the creation of lasting peace. For this purpose the defeat of aggressive force, as a result of the victory of the Allies and the removal of the threat of new aggression, at any rate in the first years after the war, will create favorable conditions. The Soviet Government consider that the small countries will require some time, which cannot yet be definitely calculated and which will not be the same for all of them, to enable them fully to orientate themselves in the new situation created as a result of the war and in the re-created relationships with neighboring and other States, without being subjected to any outside pressure to join this or that new grouping of states. The premature and possibly artificial attachment of these countries to theoretically planned groupings would be full of danger both for the small countries themselves, as well as for the future peaceful development of Europe. Such an important step as federation with other states and the possible renunciation of part of their sovereignty is admissible only as a result of a free, peaceful and well-considered expression of the will of the people. It is to be feared that neither the existing émigré governments nor even the governments which will be set up immediately after the conclusion of peace under conditions still not sufficiently normal, will be able fully to ensure the expression of the real will and permanent aspirations of their people. The creation of such federations by the decisions of émigré governments, which, in virtue of their special situation, cannot be closely bound with their people, might be interpreted as imposing on the people decisions not in conformity with their wishes. It would be particularly unjust if countries which had become satellites of Hitlerite Germany should at once be placed, as equal members of any such federation, in conditions as favorable as those of other small states which had been the victims of attack and occupation at the hands, among others, of those same satellites, and thus freed from the consequences of their part in the Hitler-Mussolini crimes.

Moreover, some of the plans for federations remind the Soviet people of the policy of the “cordon sanitaire”, directed as is known, against the Soviet Union and therefore viewed unfavorably by the Soviet people.

For these reasons the Soviet Government consider it premature from the point of view of the interests both of the small countries [Page 763] themselves, and of the general post-war settlement of Europe, now to plan and thus artificially to encourage combinations of any states in the form of federations and so forth. They will in due course be ready to re-examine this question in the light of the experience of post-war cooperation with other United Nations and of the circumstances which may arise after the war.


Joint Action for Assistance to Other Countries19

In the immediate post-war period, the most urgent matters of relief and rehabilitation in third countries presumably will be taken care of on a cooperative basis, mainly through the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration.
We believe that it would be desirable to have the longer-range work of reconstruction dealt with on a cooperative, joint-action basis. In this connection, economic and financial experts of the United States have given preliminary study to the possibility of setting up an international lending agency which would supplement the facilities which may be offered by private investors, private financial institutions, and governmental lending agencies.
The important question of the amount of aid for rehabilitation from the long-range viewpoint will of course have to be determined, from time to time in the future, by each Government in the light of developments relating to the ability of a given nation to render material aid, while at the same time receiving the necessary support of public opinion.


Bases of Our Program for International Economic Cooperation19

The basic objective of our economic policy is to help create conditions which would enable each country after the war to restore its economic activity as rapidly and as effectively as possible, and thereafter to improve progressively its production, distribution, employment and living standards. All this requires a large measure of international cooperation in many directions.

The first obvious steps, some of which will need to be undertaken even before the attainment of complete victory, relate to international cooperation in providing relief and to cooperative arrangements for the handling of economic problems involved in the occupation of [Page 764] enemy territories and operations in liberated countries. Arrangements required for these purposes are now under way through the negotiations looking to the convocation of a United Nations Conference on Relief and Rehabilitation and through such measures as the creation of the Mediterranean Commission.

Beyond these steps, international cooperation in the economic field will be indispensable for the following purposes:

Bringing about an expansion of international trade on a nondiscriminatory basis. To this end we believe that consideration needs to be given to the following:
The conclusion of a general convention to which all of the important countries of the world would be parties, which would lay down the rules and principles that should govern trade relations between nations. Such a convention would contain provisions whereby each country would abstain from practices such as nations in the past have adopted in a futile attempt to benefit themselves at the expense of world trade and the welfare of other nations. It would make provision for concrete steps whereby the participating countries would abandon preferences and discriminations, reduce their trade barriers and refrain from export dumping practices. The agreement or agreements would be so drawn as to enable a state-trading country to adhere on an equitable basis.
The orderly regulation and ultimately the elimination of arrangements, public or private, to restrict production and trade in individual commodities. To this end we believe that consideration should be given the following:
The conclusion of special international agreements relating primarily to the marketing of commodities in chronic over-supply or subject to extreme variation in prices.
International arrangements for the regulation of cartel activities.
The establishment of stable foreign exchange rates and of the inter changeability of currencies. To this end discussions are now in progress among the United Nations looking to the creation of an International Stabilization Fund.
Promotion of the development of resources and industries where-ever international assistance is necessary for this purpose. To this end consideration is being given to the possibility of creating appropriate international investment agencies and other improved facilities for international investment and for exchange of technical information and personnel.
Improvement of facilities for shipping, air traffic and other means of transportation. This will involve:
International consideration of the reestablishment of the merchant fleets of the world, the adjustment of ship-building activity, and related topics.
International agreement on all aspects of commercial aviation, including passenger and freight traffic arrangements, landing rights, rights of transit, exchange of technical information questions of subsidization.
Similar international discussions regarding problems involved in the improvement of other transportation facilities.
Improvement of means of telecommunication. This will require the extension of international collaboration already existing in this sphere.
Improvement of nutrition and consumption in general. The United Nations Conference on Food and Agriculture, held at Hot Springs, Virginia, May 18 to June 3, 1943,20 laid the foundation for international collaboration in this field with regard to the consumption of agricultural products. This work is being carried forward by the Interim Commission on Food and Agriculture. It looks forward to the promotion of appropriate domestic policies for each country and to the establishment of a permanent international organization in this field.
Improvement of labor standards and conditions. This involves; primarily development of the work which has been well carried on by the International Labor Organization.

It is clear that in connection with most of these subjects there will be need for organized discussions among the United Nations, both informal and in formal conferences. We believe that the time has come for the establishment of a Commission comprising representatives of the principal United Nations and possibly certain others of the United Nations for the joint planning of the best procedures to be followed in these matters. Such a Commission might consist of technical economic experts of the United States, the United Kingdom, Soviet Union, China, and possibly certain other countries such as Canada, the Netherlands and Brazil.

Even before the establishment of such a Commission we believe it to be of the greatest importance that our government and the governments of each of the major United Nations should confer with each other on the technical level as freely and as promptly as possible with the view to exploring the problems which are bound to confront them and the world.

The Government of the United States has recently addressed an invitation to the Government of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics to send to Washington a group of economic experts to engage in discussions with our experts of matters relating to Article VII of the Mutual Aid Agreement. Similar invitations were extended to the Governments of the United Kingdom and of China.

In response to this invitation, the British Government has sent such a group of experts to Washington, and as a result a most fruitful informal interchange of views has taken place between us on many topics of basic importance in the fields of monetary stabilization, international investment, commercial policy, commodity arrangements [Page 766] and related questions.* These conversations provided an opportunity to discover the extent to which there is common ground and the extent to which there are differences of importance in the points of view of those whose expert advice may frequently be utilized in the formulation of policy.

It is particularly important that similar conversations be arranged soon between Soviet and American experts. It is our earnest hope, therefore, that the Soviet Government, which participated in the Hot Springs Conference and is now participating in the work of the Interim Commission and in the discussions relating to relief, will find it possible to arrange for such an interchange of views in the near future.


Memorandum Concerning the Washington Meeting Between British and American Economic Experts With Reference to Article VII of the Mutual-Aid Agreement

In the informal discussions which ended on October 18 in Washington between United States and United Kingdom economic experts the following general topics were explored:

Commercial Policy.
International Commodity Arrangements.
Coordination of measures to promote employment.

Parallel with these discussions further exchanges of views took place at the Treasury with regard to monetary stabilization. There was also a preliminary exchange of views on the subject of promotion of international investment.

The following are brief summaries of the topics discussed under each of the four headings listed above. It will be noted that in each case no attempt was made to reach definite conclusions but rather to prepare an orderly agenda for further study by each of the respective governments and for possible further informal joint conversations.

1. Commercial policy.

Consideration was given to the relative effectiveness and feasibility of the multilateral as compared with the bilateral method for bringing about a reduction of tariffs. In this connection a number of formulas were examined and compared without, however, at this stage attempting a selection. Consideration was also given to the substantial abolition of preferences and discriminations and the question of the relation of action in this field to the reduction of tariff barriers.

[Page 767]

The need for and feasibility of the abolition on a multilateral basis of quantitative restrictions on trade were examined. The question of abolishing export taxes and restrictions was similarly considered as was the general question of subsidies.

The subject of state trading of various types and the need for harmonizing the interests of countries employing such a system with those of other countries was examined. Although no attempt was made to reach definitive conclusions it was apparent from the discussions that this problem should present no great difficulties.

Finally, provisional consideration was given to the need for creating some international body to facilitate the application of such basic principles of commercial policy as may be developed.

2. International Commodity Arrangements.

The problems discussed were:

Short-term price fluctuations in primary products.
Periodic slumps in demand and in prices as related to the business cycle.
Excess capacity in relation to past stimulation of high-cost production and to special war-time measures affecting production.

Methods of dealing with these problems were considered, having regard to securing efficient production and, at the same time, to mitigating the hardship on producers in making adjustments to conform to demand.

The methods included:

Buffer stocks.
Quantitative regulation schemes.

The discussion included the possibility of stating principles which might govern arrangements for dealing with commodity problems and the possible relation of such arrangements to existing inter-governmental and private international commodity schemes and to other parts of the international economic system, including commercial policy agreements.

3. Cartels.

Consideration was given to problems likely to arise in the post-war world from the activities of international cartels. The interchange of views was not so extensive as in the case of the other topics discussed. It was agreed that much further discussion was needed. The officials recommended that each group separately should examine the problems arising from international cartels and appropriate measures, national and international, to solve them with a view to joint discussion at some future date.

Preliminary views were presented by the United States officials on the possible consequences of international cartels in obstructing production and trade and in endangering national and international security.

[Page 768]

The United States officials proposed that further consideration should be given to the possibility of intergovernmental undertakings:

To register all non-governmental international agreements for the establishment of enduring relationships between private business enterprises;
To introduce measures to make information about registered agreements available to governments or to international institutions;
To prohibit practices by international cartels inimical to the expansion of production, trade and consumption including, inter alia, price fixing and restrictions on the exploitation of inventions.

4. Employment policies.

The problems discussed under the foregoing three heads relate to a wide complex of policies which influence the level of employment in individual countries and in the world as a whole. Some of these policies are of a domestic nature, but facilities should be provided for consultation and for the exchange of information between governments on these matters as well as on matters of a more directly international nature with a view to the harmonization of policies.

The experts therefore discussed:

The desirability of establishing an international advisory economic staff charged with the study of international economic questions with particular reference to the harmonization of measures, national and international, for the maintenance of high levels of productive employment.
The functions and organization of such a staff.
The character of the governing body to which it should be responsible.


Declaration of German Atrocities21

The United Kingdom, the United States and the Soviet Union have received from many quarters evidence of atrocities, massacres and cold-blooded mass executions which are being perpetrated by the Hitlerite forces in the many countries they have overrun and from which they are now being steadily expelled. The brutalities of Hitlerite domination are no new thing and all the peoples or territories in their grip have suffered from the worst form of government by terror. What is new is that many of these territories are now being redeemed by the advancing armies of the liberating Powers and that in their desperation, the recoiling Hitlerite Huns are redoubling [Page 769] their ruthless cruelties. This is now evidenced with particular clearness by monstrous crimes of the Hitlerites on the territory of the Soviet Union which is being liberated from the Hitlerites, and on French and Italian territory.

Accordingly, the aforesaid three allied Powers, speaking in the interests of the thirty-two United Nations, hereby solemnly declare and give full warning of their declaration as follows:—

At the time of the granting of any armistice to any government which may be set up in Germany, those German officers and men and members of the Nazi party who have been responsible for, or have taken a consenting part in the above atrocities, massacres and executions, will be sent back to the countries in which their abominable deeds were done in order that they may be judged and punished according to the laws of these liberated countries and of the free governments which will be created therein. Lists will be compiled in all possible detail from all these countries having regard especially to the invaded parts of the Soviet Union, to Poland and Czechoslovakia, to Yugoslavia and Greece, including Crete and other islands, to Norway, Denmark, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxemburg, France and Italy.

Thus, the Germans who take part in wholesale shootings of Italian officers or in the execution of French, Dutch, Belgian or Norwegian hostages or of Cretan peasants, or who have shared in the slaughters inflicted on the people of Poland or in territories of the Soviet Union which are now being swept clear of the enemy, will know that they will be brought back to the scene of their crimes and judged on the spot by the peoples whom they have outraged. Let those who have hitherto not imbrued their hands with innocent blood beware lest they join the ranks of the guilty, for most assuredly the three allied Powers will pursue them to the uttermost ends of the earth and will deliver them to their accusers in order that justice may be done.

The above declaration is without prejudice to the case of the major criminals, whose offences have no particular geographical localisation and who will be punished by the joint decision of the Governments of the Allies.


[Editor’s Note: Two versions of the Secret Protocol exist in the Department’s files. The first is a copy of the signed ribbon copy on file in the Office of the Assistant Legal Adviser for Treaty Affairs, where it was deposited by Mr. Cecil W. Gray upon his return from the Conference. Fifteen copies of this document were charged to President Roosevelt; Secretary Hull; Mr. Stettinius, the Under Secretary; [Page 770] Mr. Hackworth, the Legal Adviser; Mr. Pasvolsky, Special Assistant to the Secretary of State; Mr. Dunn, Adviser on Political Relations; and Mr. Geist, Chief of the Division of Communications and Records.

On November 11, 1943, Mr. Dunn informed the Secretary that copies of a revised Secret Protocol had been made available to Messrs. Harriman, Kirk, Murphy, Wilson, Winant, Phillips, Biddle, and Atherton. He suggested that additional copies be made available in the Department to the Under Secretary, the Assistant Secretaries, the Legal Adviser, the Political Advisers, Chiefs of Geographic Divisions, and the Special Assistants to the Secretary. Approximately twenty copies of this document were circulated.

Apparently the revised edition was authorized for two reasons: to omit any reference to the existence of a “Most Secret Protocol”, and to prevent any indication of the nature of those matters discussed by military and naval representatives.

The following variations appear on the revised text:

Item 1
This matter was discussed by the military experts.
Item 4(c)
Item 7(a)
(See Annex 7) added.
Item 12
“Note was taken of the statement . . .” omitted.

Annex 7 (“Future of Poland and Danubian and Balkan countries, including the question of Confederations”) was omitted from the revised versions, and Conference Document No. 20 (“The Treatment of Germany”), page 720, was substituted. The reason for this substitution is not clear.]

  1. Post, p. 770.
  2. For further documentation on this subject, see bracketed note, p. 1050.
  3. The American title of this document is “Civil Affairs for France”. [Footnote in the original.]
  4. For correspondence on proposed agreement covering the presence of American troops in Iran, see vol. iv, pp. 453 ff.
  5. For further documentation on this subject, see pp. 484 ff.
  6. For further documentation on this subject, see pp. 801 ff.
  7. See Conference Document No. 7, p. 708, and footnote 84, p. 710.
  8. See vol. ii, pp. 314 ff.
  9. Combined Chiefs of Staff.
  10. For correspondence on the annexation of Austria by Germany, see Foreign Relations, 1938, vol. i, pp. 384 ff.
  11. A statement by the Soviet delegation.
  12. Memorandum presented by the Secretary of State.
  13. Memorandum presented by the Secretary of State.
  14. For correspondence relating to this Conference, see pp. 820 ff.
  15. See attached Memorandum Concerning the Washington Meeting Between British and American Economic Experts with Reference to Article VII of the Mutual-Aid Agreement. [Footnote in the original.]
  16. The Soviet Government, in a memorandum dated October 25, agreeing to the draft statement by Prime Minister Churchill (see p. 556), requested the changes which are embodied in the text printed here, viz., adding the final sentence in the first paragraph, substituting “Soviet Union” for “Russia” in the third paragraph, omitting “regardless of expense” from the fourth paragraph, and adding the final clause in the fifth paragraph. These proposed changes were adopted.