840.70/11–1244: Telegram
The Acting Secretary of State to the Chargé in the United Kingdom (Gallman)
9526. For EITO Delegation.
I. Late on November 11 Department made available informally to British Embassy for transmittal to the Foreign Office, Department’s “tentative proposed reply”86 to the Soviet note on the Polish question. The Department hopes to give final clearance to its reply shortly. The Department proposes to reply that the EITO conference is a technical discussion in which there should not be injected political questions with far reaching consequences and expressing the hope that [Page 866] on review the Soviets will continue to participate. As the Department’s reply has not received final approval and of course has not been delivered, it should not be discussed with anyone, including your British colleagues.
It was only after receipt of your 9808 of November 10 that TEC87 was able to locate your despatch 18928 of October 3188 which had inadvertently been misrouted. Obviously Department is not in a position to give instructions on suggested amendments until your full revised text is received and then only after full consideration within the Department and possibly other agencies. This is time consuming.
II. On the other hand the U.S.–U.K. replies to the Soviet notes should not be delayed any more than necessary. Therefore Department proposes that prior to delivery of the U.S.–U.K. replies to the Soviets, the Soviets and the other continental delegations be advised in some informal manner by the Chairman of the Main Committee, possibly orally or by telephone, that informal discussions will be held outside of Committee to arrive at an acceptable text. After this information has been conveyed to the various delegations, the U.S.–U.K. replies to the Soviet notes could be delivered.
This procedure should not be confused with Ronald’s proposal for “sounding out” allies on Ronald formula and redraft as set forth in II your 9879, November 12. Department’s proposed procedure might well lay the groundwork for any “sounding out” procedure that might be decided on later.
The advantages to this procedure seem to be the following:
- 1)
- Steps would be taken to continue the conference at a technical level;
- 2)
- Continued Soviet participation in technical discussions will have been solicited without reference to the political questions raised in their notes;
- 3)
- Affords a basis for continuing the discussions with the other continental powers irrespective of the action taken by the Soviets;
- 4)
- It avoids the necessity of having the Soviets sit at the same table with the Poles;
- 5)
- It does not commit us to request the Soviet views first;
- 6)
- It gives us time to consider a proposed redraft which has not yet been received by the Department.
Your urgent consideration of this procedure is requested.
III. This procedure seems to afford another advantage, namely that it would permit the Interim Commission to begin functioning and open the way to asking the Soviets whether they intend to participate. Department feels that the establishment of the Interim Commission is particularly important, especially if we are seriously to consider the Ronald formula, as it is difficult to perceive how an agreement with [Page 867] only limited participants, as envisaged by the Ronald formula, could effectively operate. In other words, the Interim Commission could be the effective mechanism for carrying out the essential functions of EITO pending the signature of the agreement by the allies whose territory is not yet liberated. The Department requests your views as to how EITO would come into being and would function under the Ronald formula.