L/T Files

No. 1416
Protocol of the Proceedings of the Yalta Conference1

Protocol of the Proceedings of the Crimea Conference

The Crimea Conference of the Heads of the Governments of the United States of America, the United Kingdom, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics which took place from February 4th to 11th came to the following conclusions.

i. world organisation

It was decided:

(1)
that a United Nations Conference on the proposed world organisation should be summoned for Wednesday, 25th April, 1945, and should be held in the United States of America.
(2)
the Nations to be invited to this Conference should be:
(a)
the United Nations as they existed on the 8th February, 1945; and
(b)
such of the Associated Nations as have declared war on the common enemy by 1st March, 1945. (For this purpose by the term “Associated Nation” was meant the eight Associated Nations and Turkey). When the Conference on World Organization is held, the delegates of the United Kingdom and United States of America will support a proposal to admit to original membership two Soviet Socialist Republics, i. e. the Ukraine and White Russia.
(3)
that the United States Government on behalf of the Three Powers should consult the Government of China and the French Provisional Government in regard to the decisions taken at the present Conference concerning the proposed World Organisation.
(4)
that the text of the invitation to be issued to all the nations which would take part in the United Nations Conference should be as follows:

invitation

“The Government of the United States of America, on behalf of itself and of the Governments of the United Kingdom, the Union of [Page 1568]Soviet Socialist Republics, and the Republic of China and of the Provisional Government of the French Republic, invite the Government of _________ to send representatives to a Conference of the United Nations to be held on 25th April, 1945, or soon thereafter, at San Francisco in the United States of America to prepare a Charter for a General International Organisation for the maintenance of international peace and security.

“The above named governments suggest that the Conference consider as affording a basis for such a Charter the Proposals for the Establishment of a General International Organisation, which were made public last October as a result of the Dumbarton Oaks Conference, and which have now been supplemented by the following provisions for Section C of Chapter VI:

“‘C. Voting

  • ‘1. Each member of the Security Council should have one vote.
  • ‘2. Decisions of the Security Council on procedural matters should be made by an affirmative vote of seven members.
  • ‘3. Decisions of the Security Council on all other matters should be made by an affirmative vote of seven members including the concurring votes of the permanent members; provided that, in decisions under Chapter VIII, Section A and under the second sentence of paragraph 1 of Chapter VIII, Section C, a party to a dispute should abstain from voting’.

“Further information as to arrangements will be transmitted subsequently.

“In the event that the Government of ________ desires in advance of the Conference to present views or comments concerning the proposals, the Government of the United States of America will be pleased to transmit such views and comments to the other participating Governments”.

territorial trusteeship

It was agreed that the five Nations which will have permanent seats on the Security Council should consult each other prior to the United Nations Conference on the question of territorial trusteeship.

The acceptance of this recommendation is subject to its being made clear that territorial trusteeship will only apply to (a) existing mandates of the League of Nations; (b) territories detached from the enemy as a result of the present war; (c) any other territory which might voluntarily be placed under trusteeship; and (d) no discussion of actual territories is contemplated at the forthcoming United Nations Conference or in the preliminary consultations,2 and it will be a matter for subsequent agreement which territories within the above categories will be placed under trusteeship.

ii. declaration on liberated europe

The following declaration has been approved:

“The Premier of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and the President of the United [Page 1569]States of America have consulted with each other in the common interests of the peoples of their countries and those of liberated Europe. They jointly declare their mutual agreement to concert during the temporary period of instability in liberated Europe the policies of their three governments in assisting the peoples liberated from the domination of Nazi Germany and the peoples of the former Axis satellite states of Europe to solve by democratic means their pressing political and economic problems.

“The establishment of order in Europe and the re-building of national economic life must be achieved by processes which will enable the liberated peoples to destroy the last vestiges of Nazism and Fascism and to create democratic institutions of their own choice. This is a principle of the Atlantic Charter—the right of all peoples to choose the form of government under which they will live—the restoration of sovereign rights and self-government to those peoples who have been forcibly deprived of them by the aggressor nations.

“To foster the conditions in which the liberated peoples may exercise these rights, the three governments will jointly assist the people in any European liberated state or former Axis satellite state in Europe where in their judgment conditions require (a) to establish conditions of internal peace; (b) to carry out emergency measures for the relief of distressed peoples; (c) to form interim governmental authorities broadly representative of all democratic elements in the population and pledged to the earliest possible establishment through free elections of governments responsive to the will of the people; and (d) to facilitate where necessary the holding of such elections.

“The three governments will consult the other United Nations and provisional authorities or other governments in Europe when matters of direct interest to them are under consideration.

“When, in the opinion of the three governments, conditions in any European liberated state or any former Axis satellite state in Europe make such action necessary, they will immediately consult together on the measures necessary to discharge the joint responsibilities set forth in this declaration.

“By this declaration we reaffirm our faith in the principles of the Atlantic Charter, our pledge in the Declaration by the United Nations, and our determination to build in co-operation with other peace-loving nations world order under law, dedicated to peace, security, freedom and general well-being of all mankind.

“In issuing this declaration, the Three Powers express the hope that the Provisional Government of the French Republic may be associated with them in the procedure suggested.”

iii. dismemberment of germany

It was agreed that Article 12 (a) of the Surrender Terms for Germany should be amended to read as follows:

“The United Kingdom, the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics shall possess supreme authority with respect to Germany. In the exercise of such authority they will take such steps, including the complete disarmament, demilitarisation and the dismemberment of Germany as they deem requisite for future peace and security.”

[Page 1570]

The study of the procedure for the dismemberment of Germany was referred to a Committee, consisting of Mr. Eden (Chairman), Mr. Winant and Mr. Gousev. This body would consider the desirability of associating with it a French representative.

iv. zone of occupation for the French and control council3 for germany

It was agreed that a zone in Germany, to be occupied by the French Forces, should be allocated to France. This zone would be formed out of the British and American zones and its extent would be settled by the British and Americans in consultation with the French Provisional Government.

It was also agreed that the French Provisional Government should be invited to become a member of the Allied Control Council3 for Germany.

v. reparation

The following protocol has been approved:4

1.
Germany must pay in kind for the losses caused by her to the Allied nations in the course of the war. Reparations are to be received in the first instance by those countries which have borne the main burden of the war, have suffered the heaviest losses and have organised victory over the enemy.
2.
Reparation in kind is5 to be exacted from Germany in three following forms:
a)
Removals within 2 years from the surrender of Germany or the cessation of organised resistance from the national wealth of Germany located on the territory of Germany herself as well as outside her territory (equipment, machine-tools, ships, rolling stock, German investments abroad, shares of industrial, transport and other enterprises in Germany etc.), these removals to be carried out chiefly for purpose of destroying the war potential of Germany.
b)
Annual deliveries of goods from current production for a period to be fixed.
c)
Use of German labour.
3.
For the working out on the above principles of a detailed plan for exaction of reparation from Germany an Allied Reparation Commission will be set up in Moscow. It will consist of three representatives—one [Page 1571]from the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, one from the United Kingdom and one from the United States of America.
4.
With regard to the fixing of the total sum of the reparation as well as the distribution of it among the countries which suffered from the German aggression the Soviet and American delegations agreed as follows:

“The Moscow Reparation Commission should take in its initial studies as a basis for discussion the suggestion of the Soviet Government that the total sum of the reparation in accordance with the points (a) and (b) of the paragraph 2 should be 20 billion dollars and that 50% of it should go to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.”

The British delegation was of the opinion that pending consideration of the reparation question by the Moscow Reparation Commission no figures of reparation should be mentioned.

The above Soviet-American proposal has been passed to the Moscow Reparation Commission as one of the proposals to be considered by the Commission.

vi. major war criminals

The Conference agreed that the question of the major war criminals should be the subject of enquiry by the three Foreign Secretaries for report in due course after the close of the Conference.

vii. poland

The following Declaration on Poland was agreed by the Conference:

“A new situation has been created in Poland as a result of her complete liberation by the Red Army. This calls for the establishment of a Polish Provisional Government which can be more broadly based than was possible before the recent liberation of the Western part of Poland.6 The Provisional Government which is now functioning in Poland should therefore be reorganised on a broader democratic basis with the inclusion of democratic leaders from Poland itself and from Poles abroad. This new Government should then be called the Polish Provisional Government of National Unity.

M. Molotov, Mr. Harriman and Sir A. Clark Kerr are authorised as a commission to consult in the first instance in Moscow with members of the present Provisional Government and with other Polish democratic leaders from within Poland and from abroad, with a view to the reorganisation of the present Government along the above lines. This Polish Provisional Government of National Unity shall be pledged to the holding of free and unfettered elections as soon as possible on the basis of universal suffrage and secret ballot. In these elections all democratic and anti-Nazi parties shall have the right to take part and to put forward candidates.

“When a Polish Provisional Government of National Unity has been properly formed in conformity with the above, the Government [Page 1572]of the U. S. S. R., which now maintains diplomatic relations with the present Provisional Government of Poland, and the Government of the United Kingdom and the Government of the U. S. A. will establish diplomatic relations with the new Polish Provisional Government of National Unity, and will exchange Ambassadors by whose reports the respective Governments will be kept informed about the situation in Poland.

“The three Heads of Government consider that the Eastern frontier of Poland should follow the Curzon Line with digressions from it in some regions of five to eight kilometres in favour of Poland. They recognise that Poland must receive substantial accessions of territory in the North and West. They feel that the opinion of the new Polish Provisional Government of National Unity should be sought in due course on the extent of these accessions and that the final delimitation of the Western frontier of Poland should thereafter await the Peace Conference.”

viii. Yugoslavia

It was agreed to recommend to Marshal Tito and to Dr. Subasic:

(a)
that the Tito-Subasic Agreement7 should immediately be put into effect and a new Government formed on the basis of the Agreement.
(b)
that as soon as the new Government has been formed it should declare:
(i)
that the Anti-Fascist Assembly of National Liberation (AUNOJ) will be extended to include members of the last Yugoslav Skupstina who have not compromised themselves by collaboration with the enemy, thus forming a body to be known as a temporary Parliament and8
(ii)
that legislative acts passed by the Anti-Fascist Assembly of National Liberation (AUNOJ) will be subject to subsequent ratification by a Constituent Assembly;9

and that this statement should be published in the communique of the Conference.

ix. italo-yugoslav frontier

italo-austria frontier10

Notes on these subjects were put in by the British delegation and the American and Soviet delegations agreed to consider them and give their views later.

[Page 1573]

x. yugoslav-bulgarian relations

There was an exchange of views between the Foreign Secretaries on the question of the desirability of a Yugoslav-Bulgarian pact of alliance. The question at issue was whether a state still under an armistice regime could be allowed to enter into a treaty with another state. Mr. Eden suggested that the Bulgarian and Yugoslav Governments should be informed that this could not be approved. Mr. Stettinius suggested that the British and American Ambassadors should discuss the matter further with M. Molotov in Moscow. M. Molotov agreed with the proposal of Mr. Stettinius.

xi. south eastern europe

The British Delegation put in notes for the consideration of their colleagues on the following subjects:

(a)
the Control Commission in Bulgaria
(b)
Greek claims upon Bulgaria, more particularly with reference to reparations.
(c)
Oil equipment in Roumania.

xii. iran11

Mr. Eden, Mr. Stettinius and M. Molotov exchanged views on the situation in Iran.11 It was agreed that this matter should be pursued through the diplomatic channel.

xiii. meetings of the three foreign secretaries

The Conference agreed that permanent machinery should be set up for consultation between the three Foreign Secretaries; they should meet as often as necessary, probably about every three or four months.

These meetings will be held in rotation in the three capitals, the first meeting being held in London.

xiv. the montreux convention and the straits

It was agreed that at the next meeting of the three Foreign Secretaries to be held in London, they should consider proposals which it was understood the Soviet Government would put forward in relation to the Montreux Convention and report to their Governments.12 The Turkish Government should be informed at the appropriate moment.

[Page 1574]

The foregoing Protocol was approved and signed by the three Foreign Secretaries at the Crimean Conference, February 11, 1945.

  • E R Stettinius, Jr
  • B. Молотов13
  • Anthony Eden
  1. Released to the press by the Department of State March 24, 1947.
  2. The final s of “consultations” was added with pen and ink. The change is not initialed in the margin.
  3. The word “Council” is a substitution, with pen and ink, for “Commission” as typed. In the margin opposite the change is a small penned question mark The change is not initialed.
  4. The word “Council” is a substitution, with pen and ink, for “Commission” as typed. In the margin opposite the change is a small penned question mark The change is not initialed.
  5. The word “Council” is a substitution, with pen and ink, for “Commission” as typed. In the margin opposite the change is a small penned question mark The change is not initialed.
  6. The word “is” is handwritten, replacing “are” as typed. The change is not initialed in the margin.
  7. The phrase “of the Western part of Poland” read “of Western Poland” as typed, but was revised by hand on the original, with no initials in the margin.
  8. For the text of this agreement, see Foreign Relations, The Conferences at Malta and Yalta, 1945, pp. 251 254.
  9. As typed, this subparagraph began “that the National Liberation Committee”. The changes were made in handwriting, with the initials of Bohlen in the margin.
  10. As typed, this subparagraph began “that legislative acts passed by the National Liberation Committee”. The changes were made in handwriting, with the initials of Bohlen in the margin.
  11. This heading should perhaps read “Austro-Yugoslav Frontier”. See Foreign Relations, The Conferences at Malta and Yalta, 1945, p. 981, footnote 10.
  12. Changed by hand from “Persia” as typed in the original. No initials in the margin.
  13. Changed by hand from “Persia” as typed in the original. No initials in the margin.
  14. In the original as typed the phrase at the end of this sentence read “to the three Governments.” The change was made by hand, with no initials in the margin.
  15. V. Molotov.