Lot 60–D 224, Box 55: D.O./P.R./38
Memorandum by the Under Secretary of State ( Stettinius ) to the Secretary of State
Subject: Progress Report on Dumbarton Oaks Conversations—Fortieth Day
Status of Arrangements for Publication on Monday, October 9
(a) Conversation with Ambassador Gromyko
I telephoned to Ambassador Gromyko this morning and he repeated to me his assurance that his Government is fully agreeable to the plan for simultaneous publication in the four capitals of the agreed proposals on Monday, October 9, at noon, Washington time, provided that [Page 870] agreement is reached in the meantime as to the fourth paragraph of the accompanying communiqué. In this connection I informed him that the Chinese group had agreed to the publication of the agreed proposals without modification and without a supplementary statement of additional proposals.
(b) Instructions Telephoned to Ambassador Winant
Ambassador Winant was informed by telephone that it is of the utmost importance that the British agree promptly to the proposed publication on October 9 and that, to this end, we are most desirous that they and the Soviet Government reach agreement as to the proposed communiqué. Ambassador Winant was requested promptly to inform the Foreign Office that because of our desire to avoid delay we would be prepared to agree to either the text of the fourth paragraph preferred by the Russians or the text preferred by the British.78 He was also asked to suggest to the Foreign Office that, in order to ensure expedition, consideration should be given to omission of the disputed paragraph altogether, in view of the fact that this paragraph merely reaffirms that portion of the Moscow Declaration which relates to solidarity in the enforcement of the surrender terms.79
(c) Statement of the British Group
The British group informed me that they had today talked to Sir Alexander Cadogan by telephone. He had said that the entire question of publication would have to be passed upon by the Cabinet tonight but had felt that it was pretty well settled that the decision would be in the affirmative, provided the British proposal as to the fourth paragraph was adopted. I informed the British and Chinese groups of our position in the matter as communicated to Ambassador Winant.
[Page 871](d) Chinese Position
The Chinese were most cooperative, and assured me that they are prepared to publish the proposals on Monday, noon.80 They also gave every indication that they would go along with any decision reached in respect to the disputed fourth paragraph of the communiqué.
(e) Circular Telegram to our South American Missions
We are tonight cabling our South American Missions81 to be prepared, at the moment of release to the press, to present copies of the agreed proposals informally and as a matter of courtesy to the Foreign Ministers or Presidents to which they are accredited.
Meeting of the Joint Steering Committee at 3:00 p.m.
At Dr. Koo’s request we held an interesting meeting of the Joint Steering Committee. Dr. Koo gave us a full expression of his views as to matters relating to voting in the Council. In this connection he and his associate, Mr. Victor Hoo, Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs, made a number of interesting and helpful suggestions. Dr. Koo stated that on the fundamental question of the right of a permanent member to vote in matters relating to a dispute in which it is involved, the Chinese position coincides with ours and that of the British. Lord Halifax again attended the meeting and took an active part in the discussion.
- The Soviet draft emphasized merely that the governments “which are already directly and jointly engaged” in the war together, were resolved to work together in enforcing surrender terms on the enemy. The British wanted such enforcement to he imposed not only by such governments but “with all the other governments jointly engaged in the suppression of the forces that have disturbed the peace of the world.” (Diary, October 5, p. 3.)↩
-
The pertinent language of the Moscow Declaration of Four Nations (paragraph 5) reads as follows:
“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.” ( Foreign Relations, 1943, vol. i, p. 756.)
Ambassador Winant wired from London on October 6, 6 p.m., in telegram 8402, that immediately on getting the Department’s telephone call he pressed the need of clearing the Dumbarton Oaks statement with Sir Alexander Cadogan, that the Cabinet had cleared the statement the night before with a reservation to await Moscow’s reply, and that the British Embassy in Washington would communicate with the Department when an answer had been received from Moscow (500.CC/10–544).
↩ - Mr. Grew pointed out at the afternoon meeting of the Joint Steering Committee that if publication could be made October 9, noon, Washington time, simultaneous publication in China would, because of the difference in time, be on October 10, the Chinese anniversary known as the Double Tenth. (Minutes of meeting of Joint Steering Committee, October 5.)↩
- Circular telegram, October 7, 7 p.m., p. 930.↩