740.00112 European War 1939/10621: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Minister in Sweden (Johnson)
776. 1. The fact that, according to Wallenberg and Ståhle,37 Swedes are considering solution to bearings problem along the lines of embargo on exports to all belligerents, is of greatest interest to Department. Please report immediately anything further along these lines.
2. Your 1419, April 23rd, 5 p.m. stated “Swedish Aide-Mémoire says United States Government is aware that request for compliance with demand implies that Swedish Government should refuse to fulfill engagements entered into”. Department’s 2764, April 8th, 4 p.m. stated “We agree to the British proposal for a demand for an embargo for a definite period of 3 months during which negotiations could [Page 526] take place, and sub-paragraph (a) of paragraph 3 of Department’s 2604 to London38 (576 to Stockholm) is modified accordingly”. (Obviously, however, our ultimate objective in such negotiations will be the permanent cessation of exports of bearings, etc. to Germany.) Your 1317, April 17th,39 quoted Dagens of the 16th “Irregularity often caused by Germans offers precedent should Sweden desire without breaching treaty to curtail ball-bearing exports indefinitely while investigating whether negotiations with both sides might reconcile conflicting trade demands”.
You will recall that Hägglöf said in his letter of March 3rd to Foot that he agreed that only about one-twelfth of the ball bearings provided for in the Swedish-German agreement would be exported to Germany each month. Moreover, your 1273, April 14th, 2 p.m.39 stated that statistics for January showed exports of machine tools in the 10–20 ton range were 352,115 crowns compared with the ceiling of 273,000 crowns established for the whole year 1944. It would seem then that there is no obligation on the Swedes to ship commodities under the Swedish-German agreement at a particular time, and that in some cases the Swedes have exported the entire amount of commodities under the ceiling in the first month of 1944.
In view of these facts, a request for a 3 months’ cessation of the export of bearings to Germany would not appear to be a violation of the Swedish-German agreement and since the Swedes have exported in January full amount under one ceiling, they might well postpone the export of other commodities until the last of the year.
It may prove that SKF has promised specific delivery dates to the Germans, but such promises cannot be regarded as Swedish Government obligation and thus failure to meet such schedules cannot be regarded as a violation of the Swedish-German agreement.
If you have not already done so it is suggested that you might take an early opportunity to point out to the Swedes that a 3-months’ cessation would not violate the Swedish-German agreement. (Your 1328 April 17.39) We consider this an important point since the assumption that we are requesting action that constitutes a violation seems to be the basis of a negative reply made by the Swedes to our démarche.
3. Such a discussion is left to your discretion, however, in view of developments referred to in paragraph 1 of this telegram. It is noted in this connection, however, that Boheman in his conversation with you on April 25th made no reference to possibility of an embargo. Your 1454, April 25th, 9 p.m.
Sent to Stockholm, repeated to London.