740.00112 European War 1939/10554: Telegram
The Ambassador in the United Kingdom (Winant) to the Secretary of State
[Received April 15—7:22 p.m.]
3100. For Department and Stone, FEA from Riefler. Reference Embassy’s 2977, April 12, Hägglöf in a call on Riefler Friday98 expressed great concern that threat clause in Stockholm démarche signified rupture of War Trade Agreement of 1943 if Sweden could not meet our demands. He elaborated at great length thesis that small countries such as Sweden lived and maintained their independence by rigorous observance of agreements. He contended vigorously that they should not be subject to reprisals for making a commercial agreement with Germany that conformed to a War Trade Agreement previously negotiated with us.
[Page 506]Riefler emphasized that clause in question signified importance which his Government placed on elimination of Swedish exports of ball bearings at present time and that inquiries as to its specific meaning should be addressed to American Legation in Stockholm or to Washington. He also emphasized at great length opportunity presented to Sweden to make a really vital contribution to United Nations in winning the war.
Hägglöf seemed attracted by this thesis but contended his Government would probably be forced to refuse on ground that they must maintain agreements. When Riefler pointed out that the SKF company as a private business organization had a right to accept or reject orders and to break its business contracts with Germany if it pleased, Hägglöf seemed somewhat attracted but then went back to a passionate plea that there was little basis for new negotiations if threat clause meant that we were prepared to repudiate an agreement such as the War Trade Agreement of 1943 not because it had been violated but because the situation had changed and we desired a new concession.
Repeated to Stockholm as 131. [Riefler.]
- April 14.↩