Foreign Relations of the United States: Diplomatic Papers, The Conference of Berlin (The Potsdam Conference), 1945, Volume II

Truman Papers

Department of State Minutes

Potsdam, August 1, 1945, 10:40 p.m.

Top secret

The last meeting of the Big Three convened at 10:40 p.m. on Wednesday, the first of August 1945.

The President stated that Mr. Byrnes had a report from the Economic Subcommittee.³

Mr. Byrnes stated that the Economic Subcommittee had reported regarding reparations and it was his understanding that agreement had been reached by all delegations.

Mr. Byrnes then read the text.⁴

Mr. Byrnes called attention to sections 8 and 9 of the reparations report. He disliked greatly to suggest amendments but felt that he should in the interests of all parties concerned. Paragraph 8 read as follows: “The Soviet Government renounces all claims to enterprises located, etc.” He suggested the insertion after the word “claims” the words “in respect of reparations.” The purpose of this change would be to avoid creating the impression that the Soviet Government had claims other than reparations. The same language should be inserted in the next paragraph with respect to the United States and the United Kingdom.

Mr. Byrnes stated that this is the only change and asked whether the reparations document could be considered to be approved.

Mr. Bevin asked for the text of the proposed amendment and cited as an example the possibility that the Germans had taken over works belonging to British nationals for war purposes before 1939. In such a case the British by this amendment would be renouncing that property.

Mr. Byrnes replied that the language provides that the Soviet Government renounces all claims in respect to reparations. In the case cited by Mr. Bevin the amendment would not affect the situation but if the language was not there it would affect it.

Mr. Attlee agreed.

Mr. Byrnes then asked whether Mr. Molotov agreed with the paper on war trophies.)⁵

Mr. Molotov proposed that an insertion be made in the record to the effect that the Conference had adopted the American suggestion⁶ in principle. The Soviet Delegation did not have time to discuss this paper and the wording should be agreed on afterward. The Soviet Delegation agreed in regard to its substance. Everyone had been busy on either the protocol or committees.

Mr. Byrnes stated that he had before him a paper which he was informed the three members of the committee had tentatively agreed to.

Mr. Molotov stated that he hadn’t read it.

Mr. Byrnes asked the President whether there was anything else to do but agree.

The President agreed.

Mr. Byrnes stated that in regard to the protocol he had been informed that there was agreement between the three representatives.⁷ Therefore, it was unnecessary to read portions regarding the settlement of disputed questions unless there was some objection here to these agreements. It should be added to the protocol that they had agreed in principle regarding the trophy paper.⁸

Mr. Molotov then suggested an amendment concerning the question of the western frontier of Poland in paragraph 2.⁹ This paragraph stated that the line ran from the Baltic Sea through Swinemünde. He suggested the substitution of the words “west of” instead of “through.”

Mr. Attlee agreed.

The President asked how far west.¹⁰

Mr. Molotov stated that it was shown on the map.¹¹

Mr. Attlee stated that the map showed a line west from Swinemünde.¹²

Stalin suggested the words “immediately west of.”

The President and Mr. Attlee agreed.

Mr. Molotov then suggested an amendment to the last section of the paragraph. Instead of the words “subject to examination by experts” he suggested the words “exact line on ground should be established by experts of the U.S.S.R. and Poland.”

Mr. Bevin stated that the British could not cut themselves out of this.

Stalin replied that the question concerned the frontiers of Russia and Poland.

Mr. Bevin admitted this but stated that the line must be recognized by the United Nations. He went on to say that we have agreed at the peace settlement to support this line but it is too much to ask that we accept the line established by the Russians and Poles.

Stalin pointed out that the conditions for the borderline have been given in the document. All that remained to be done was to establish the exact frontier. This would mean only a variation of a kilometer or so including a village here or there. This is all that remains. Since the question is between the Russians and the Poles they should decide. Stalin asked who the British wanted on the commission. Was it British, Americans or Australians?

Mr. Attlee stated that we had agreed in principle to the transfer but that the ultimate transfer had been left to the peace conference and this was being anticipated by the proposed amendment.

Stalin asked what Attlee desired.

Mr. Bevin replied that they wished to have a commission of experts appointed by the peace conference.

Stalin indicated that he could not understand this attitude.

Mr. Byrnes thought the original language to be desirable since if the two countries most concerned were in peaceful agreement between themselves he assumed that no one else would be concerned. If there was disagreement, the line could be settled only by expert examination provided for by the Council of Foreign Ministers.

Stalin then suggested leaving the old wording and Mr. Attlee agreed.

The President stated that if the Soviet and Polish Governments were in agreement we would have no objection.

Mr. Molotov stated that he had another amendment. The section regarding admission into the United Nations,¹³ paragraph 1 should be amended. The first sentence of paragraph 1 now reads: (wording read). This wording had been accepted before agreement had been reached on the wording of paragraph 3, which provides for possible resumption of diplomatic relations before the conclusion of peace. These two sections were contradictory and it was evident that the word “thereafter” [in paragraph 1] should be deleted.

Mr. Attlee pointed out that this was not quite correct. Paragraph 2 [3?] read “to the extent possible.” If “thereafter” was deleted it would go farther than intended. It should be left in.

Mr. Molotov pointed out that paragraph 1 says that relations will be restored only after the conclusion of peace, but paragraph 3 provides for possible resumption before then.¹⁴

Mr. Attlee replied that that was exactly why the British wanted this in. The first paragraph was mandatory and provides that relations will be restored after the conclusion of peace. The second [third?] provides that an attempt will be made before then.

Stalin stated that he could not agree to this.

Mr. Attlee again pointed out that the first paragraph speaks of normal relations while the second [third?] paragraph means that we would get as close as possible to relations. There is no conflict.

Mr. Bevin stated that he would agree to the insertion of “as soon as possible thereafter full diplomatic relations, etc.”

Stalin again stated that he could not agree to such an interpretation. He gave the example of Finland and stated that there is no ground for failing to give recognition to the present Finnish Government.

Mr. Bevin pointed out that Britain was still at war with Finland.

Mr. Molotov stated that technically speaking we were at war with Italy but America and the Soviet Union have established relations with that country.¹⁴

Mr. Attlee then stated that they were now going back to old discussions. He thought that the British had explained fully that they can’t go farther than this constitutionally.¹⁵ They had already made great concessions here and could not make more.

Stalin stated that it was not possible to arrive at an understanding. Finland has more right to recognition than Italy. It has a freely elected government. Finland got out of the war a long time ago and fought against Germany. Why should not the resumption of diplomatic relations with Finland be permitted.

Mr. Bevin stated that he was anxious to agree. He read a suggested amendment¹⁶ to which Stalin and The President agreed.

Mr. Molotov then stated that he had no other amendments.

Mr. Byrnes announced that the protocol had now been agreed to. He went on to state that the remaining business was the communiqué.

Mr. Bevin stated that he had a slight amendment to offer on page l.¹⁷

Mr. Byrnes stated that he had a British paper¹⁸ to be substituted for page 1. The change was very slight and he had no objection.

Stalin asked where the change was.

Mr. Byrnes replied that it was on the second page of the committee report.¹⁹ Apparently two paragraphs had been combined. There was no material difference.

Mr. Attlee then read the British substitute.

Stalin suggested postponement of the question of the preamble until other questions had been discussed.

The President expressed agreement.

Stalin asked that they begin with section 2²⁰ regarding the establishment of the Council of Foreign Ministers.

The President agreed and asked whether section 2 was satisfactory.

Stalin and Attlee agreed.

The President then asked about section 3.

Mr. Byrnes referred to the fact that there had been some objection to the words “loudly applauded.” He had no objection to striking them out.

Stalin suggested the words “openly approved.”

Mr. Byrnes suggested the words “blindly obeyed.”²¹

Mr. Bevin suggested “obeyed stupidly.”

Stalin suggested, “whom at time of their success they openly expressed approval of and blindly obeyed.”

The President and Attlee agreed.

The President asked whether there were other changes.

Stalin replied that there were none.

The President then raised section 4.

Mr. Bevin pointed out that in the words of the Economic Principles there is some repetition. Paragraph 12 and paragraph 9 (iv)²² contained exactly the same language. He suggested that this should be deleted from the Economic Principles and left in the Political.²³

Stalin announced that he had no amendments on the Economic Principles.

The President next brought up reparations.

Stalin remarked that before Political Principles they have a small (a) and that therefore there should be a (b) before Economic Principles.²⁴

The President agreed and stated that there were no amendments to 4.

The President then brought up no. 5, the disposition of the German fleet and merchant marine.

Stalin had no amendments.

The President then brought up no. 6, City of Koenigsberg and adjacent area.

Stalin agreed to this.

The President brought up no. 7, war criminals.

Mr. Molotov thought that paragraph 1²⁵ should be deleted.²⁶

Mr. Attlee and The President stated that it had been deleted on their copies.

Mr. Molotov then stated that he had a suggestion regarding Austria.²⁷ He suggested that this should not be included in the communiqué. It should be left only in the protocol. He felt that there should be no mention of it in the communiqué. He thought it was not proper to publish the decision regarding Austrian reparations. It would be in the protocol.

The President said it would be taken out.

Stalin said only about reparations.

The President replied that he would take all out or part.

Stalin said only the last paragraph.

The President then raised the matter of Poland.²⁸

Mr. Bevin suggested a slight amendment. The document says that “the following states approve [statement was approved?], etc.” He suggested that “on the Polish Provisional Government they defined their attitude in the following statement.” The opening words would stand.

Stalin and The President agreed.

Mr. Bevin then proposed that on page 2 the words “following was conclusion reached” be inserted.

The President interjected to state that he had told the Polish Government we had agreed to that.

Stalin suggested that it be left as it is.

Mr. Bevin stated that it would then be necessary to amend the words [“through Swinemünde” to] “immediately west of Swinemünde”.²⁹

This was agreed.

Stalin then mentioned no. 10, Conclusion of Peace Treaty with Italy.

Mr. Bevin presented a suggested amendment³⁰ which he stated would have psychological value.

Mr. Byrnes stated that he could see no difference in the text.

Mr. Bevin stated that it read better than the present one.

Mr. Byrnes did not agree.

Mr. Bevin stated that the new draft presents a different picture to his people.

Stalin interposed to remark that he thought the present wording contained the same idea but was shorter and clearer.

The President announced that he would accept either wording.

Mr. Bevin asked Stalin whether he would agree.

Stalin replied that the first draft is shorter and was best. However, he would accept either.

Mr. Bevin insisted that he preferred his.

Stalin stated that if Bevin insisted his proposal could be accepted.

The President agreed.

The President then announced that Mr. Byrnes had a suggestion to make on no. 4³¹ and asked that they turn back to reparations.

Mr. Attlee then interposed to state that all changes in the protocol would be embodied in the communiqué.

The President stated that the next subject was no. 11 on Trusteeship.

Stalin stated that the Russians were given very little in this paper. However, he had no objection.

The President then raised no. 12 regarding the revision of Allied Control Commission procedure in Rumania, Bulgaria, and Hungary.

Stalin agreed to this.

The President next brought up no. 13, “Transferring of German Populations”.

Stalin stated that he would agree to all the rest.

The President mentioned no. 14 regarding the bilateral commission investigating the removal of oil equipment from Rumania.

Mr. Molotov then suggested that this section and the section regarding Tangier³² be deleted from the communiqué but remain in the protocol.

Mr. Attlee supported this.

Mr. Molotov then suggested the same procedure for Iran.³³

Mr. Attlee agreed.³⁴

Mr. Byrnes asked why these were being left out.

Mr. Bevin announced that they were anxious to leave Tangier out.

Mr. Attlee called attention to the fact that it had been agreed that there would be no publicity regarding Tangier.

Mr. Bevin stated that the British agreed to the deletion of Tangier and Rumania but to keep Persia in.

Stalin insisted that all three go out.

Mr. Bevin did not agree. He wanted Tangier out and was willing to have Rumania out but Iran was important in the Near East.

Stalin then suggested that Tangier be left in.

Mr. Attlee then called attention to the fact that Molotov had not asked for a public announcement regarding Tangier.

Mr. Molotov stated that he did not insist upon publicity now but that he did think that the oil question and Iran should not be publicized.

Mr. Byrnes asked whether it could not be agreed to eliminate Tangier and the oil question since the British wanted one out and the Soviets wanted one out.

Stalin insisted that after such big, serious decisions the communiqué would be spoiled if small decisions were put in.

Mr. Byrnes asked for agreement that 2 would be out.

Stalin refused. Rumania and Tangier should be out. However, the Russians were not going to keep the Iran decision secret. They just didn’t want it in the communiqué.

Mr. Bevin asked whether he could make an announcement in the House of Commons.

Stalin replied, “Of course”.

The President then stated that all three would be out.

The President then raised no. 17, Military Discussions.

Mr. Bevin queried one word and Stalin and The President agreed to its deletion.³⁵

Stalin stated that he had no objection to this section of the communiqué.

The President then asked about the preamble.

Mr. Bevin asked to refer back to paragraph 12. The words of the last line referred to a proposal but the proposal was not published. He suggested the addition of the words, “and accepted as a basis an agreed proposal”.

Mr. Byrnes agreed.

Mr. Molotov pointed out that this should be changed [also] in the protocol.

Stalin stated his assumption that there would be a list of participants at the end of the communiqué.

The President again raised the preamble.

Stalin said he had no objection.

Mr. Byrnes said he wished to object on behalf of the Foreign Ministers. It said that the Foreign Ministers had separate meetings alone. He suggested instead of “separate” the word “regular”.

Mr. Molotov agreed. He offered a suggestion regarding the signature of the communiqué. He had before him the Tehran communiqué. This communiqué was first signed by the British Prime Minister. It was the same at the Crimea. It was agreed that at the next conference the first signature would be that of the Soviet Government. Two documents were issued at Tehran. On one the first signature had been that of President Roosevelt. On the other the first signature had been the British Prime Minister.

The President stated he had no objection.

Mr. Attlee interjected to state that he voted for an alphabetical listing. There he would score over Marshal Zhukov.

Stalin stated that if the President preferred another order of signature could be arranged.

The President stated he had no objection.

Stalin inquired about publication time.

Mr. Bevin stated that he would like to release the communiqué for publication in the Friday morning papers. It would be given out tomorrow.

Stalin agreed.

Mr. Bevin stated that this followed the Yalta formula. The time would be 9:30 GMT.

Stalin asked when it would be on the radio.

Mr. Attlee replied after release.

Mr. Byrnes asked whether the time had been agreed upon.

Mr. Bevin repeated Thursday night, 9:30 p.m. GMT.

Stalin said “August 2”.

The President said right, August 2, for the Friday morning papers.

The President then announced that Mr. Byrnes had a protocol matter to present.

Stalin repeated Thursday, 9:30 GMT.

Mr. Byrnes stated that he wished to call attention to the fact that in the English protocol there was no reference to the Ruhr industrial area. He had been told that there was such a reference in the Russian text.³⁶ He thought this should be settled so there would be no misunderstanding. He had no recollection that the disposition mentioned in the Soviet text had been made. However, he had been told that his recollection was faulty.

The President interjected to state that he had suggested reference to the Council of Foreign Ministers.³⁷

Mr. Byrnes then suggested that the draftsmen should consider more exact language in regard to the intent. The Soviet text did not say what was referred.

Mr. Molotov suggested that it be written down.

Mr. Byrnes stated that it should be the same in all three texts.

Mr. Molotov stated that the Soviet text had been submitted in writing.

Mr. Byrnes replied he was informed that the Soviet suggestion had not been ready to submit today.

Stalin then said that he thought it better to withdraw this point altogether. The matter should not be referred to the Council of Foreign Ministers.

It was withdrawn.

Mr. Byrnes agreed that this was better.

Mr. Attlee then suggested that top copies be signed by the Big Three. He thought Churchill and Eden would like to have them. These and other documents were then signed.³⁸

Stalin then asked how agreement would be reached on the final draft of the protocol.

Mr. Byrnes suggested the appointment of a committee to compare texts. He thought that language suggestions should be considered.

The President asked whether it was satisfactory that each appoint a representative to compare texts and let the rest go home.

This was agreed to.

Mr. Byrnes appointed Mr. Dunn.

Mr. Attlee appointed Sir Edward Bridges.

Stalin appointed Vyshinski.

The President stated that there was nothing further. The meeting should adjourn until they could meet again which he hoped would take place in Washington.

Mr. Attlee stated that he wished to express his thanks to the Generalissimo for the excellent arrangements made for this meeting and for our comfort and also to the President for having presided over this Conference. He expressed the hope that the Conference would be a milestone on the road the three nations were pursuing together toward permanent peace and that the friendships between the three meeting here would be strengthened.

Stalin stated that this was the Soviet desire.

The President expressed appreciation of the American Delegation to Stalin for his kind treatment and also joined in all that the Prime Minister had said.

Stalin stated that the Russian Delegation joined in the thanks to the President for presiding over the Conference.

The President stated that he had appreciated the privilege and hoped that it had been satisfactory to the Marshal and the Prime Minister.

Stalin said that he wished personally to express his thanks to Mr. Byrnes who seemed to work harder than any one else.

Mr. Byrnes expressed his deep appreciation of these kind words. He hoped that with his two colleagues he had been able to make a contribution to this Conference.

The President said that he also wished to thank the other Foreign Ministers and others who had worked to get the three to agree.

The meeting adjourned.³⁹

3. Not found in this form. The Cohen notes (post, p. 597) indicate, however, that it was a report of the Protocol Subcommittee which was discussed; cf. document No. 1383, post, section iii.
4. Not found as a separate document. It is presumably identical with document No. 1383, post, section in (Stage 1 text)
5. The paper referred to is apparently a subcommittee draft which has not been found. See ante, p. 573, footnote 19.
6. Document No. 842, post.
7. On the Protocol Subcommittee. The draft Protocol before Truman at this meeting was incorporated bodily into the United States original of the final Protocol. Changes made in it during the course of the meeting are noted in the footnotes to document No. 1383, post.
8. See document No. 1383, post, section xxi (xx).
9. See document No. 1383, post, section ix (viii) B.
10. This question is attributed to Byrnes in the Cohen notes, post, p. 597.
11. The map which was before the Heads of Government has not been found. See the map facing p. 1152, post.
12. This statement is attributed to Bevin in the Cohen notes, post, p. 597.
13. See document No. 1383, post, section x (ix).
14. This statement is attributed to Stalin in the Cohen notes, post, p. 598.
14. This statement is attributed to Stalin in the Cohen notes, post, p. 598.
15. See ante, pp. 426–427, 462.
16. Bevin’s amendment was apparently the deletion of a clause at the end of the first sentence of paragraph 1. Cf. the Cohen notes, post, p. 599, and document No. 1383, post, section x (ix), especially footnote 64.
17. Of the attachment to document No. 1380, post, section i, alternative B.
18. Attachment to document No. 1380, post, section i, alternative C.
19. The first page of alternative B of section i of the draft Communiqué ends with the words “Views were exchanged” (paragraph 5). The first page of alternative C ends with the words “on a number of other questions” (paragraph 5). Bevin, in mentioning a change on page 1, presumably referred to the omission from paragraph 5 of the clause “and they are announced in this report”. Byrnes, in calling attention to the changes on page 2, presumably referred to the modification and consolidation of the last two paragraphs of section i (alternative B) into a single final paragraph (alternative C). See the attachment to document No. 1380, post. The “committee report” text referred to by Byrnes is apparently alternative B. For a memorandum to Byrnes by an American member of the Communiqué Subcommittee commenting upon the draft text of the Communiqué, see document No. 1380, post.
20. The section numbers mentioned in this and succeeding paragraphs refer to sections of the attachment to document No. 1380, post.
21. This suggestion is attributed to Bevin in the Cohen notes, post, p. 599.
22. Of section ii of the attachment to document No. 1380, post.
23. The suggested deletion from paragraph 12 was not made in the Russian text. See post, p. 1484, footnote 24.
24. There is an indicator “B.” before the heading “Economic Principles” on the draft Communiqué which was before Truman during this meeting; see the attachment to document No. 1380, post, section in B. This indicator, however, did not appear before the comparable heading in Truman’s copy of the Protocol; see document No. 1383, post, section ii.
25. Cf. documents Nos. 1016 and 1018 and the attachment to document No. 1380, post, section vii.
26. This statement is attributed to Stalin in the Cohen notes, post, p. 599.
27. See the attachment to document No. 1380, post, section viii.
28. See the attachment to document No. 1380, post, section ix.
29. To bring the language of the Communiqué into harmony with the language approved earlier in the meeting for the Protocol. See ante, p. 588.

30. Not found as a separate document. It appears, however, from a comparison of the report by the Communiqué Subcommittee (attachment to document No. 1380, post) with the text of the Communiqué as finally issued (document No. 1384, post) that Bevin’s amendment probably involved the substitution of text (b) below for text (a) in the first paragraph of section x of the Communiqué:

    (a) “In view of the victorious end of the war in Europe and the necessity of establishing as soon as possible the conditions of lasting peace, the Conference agreed upon the following statement of common policy:”[.]

    (b) “The Conference agreed upon the following statement of common policy for establishing, as soon as possible, the conditions of lasting peace after victory in Europe:”[.]

31. Byrnes’ suggestion was presumably the insertion of the words “in respect of reparations” in section iv of the Communiqué, paragraphs 8 and 9. Cf. the attachment to document No. 1380, post, and document No. 1384, post; and see ante, pp. 586–587.
32. See the attachment to document No. 1380, post, section xvi.
33. See the attachment to document No. 1380, post, section xv.
34. This and the three preceding paragraphs, which here constitute an exchange between Molotov and Attlee, appear as an exchange between Stalin and Bevin in the Cohen notes, post, p. 600.
35. The words deleted on the draft Communiqué which was before Truman during this meeting were “affecting Europe”. Cf. the attachment to document No. 1380, section xvii; document No. 1384, section xiv; and the Cohen notes, post, p. 600. The following passage in Brown’s diary entry for August 1, relating to the consideration of the Communiqué at the Thirteenth Plenary Meeting, confirms the conclusion that the two words “affecting Europe” constituted the deletion referred to in the minutes: “… Then came communiqué. British produced new introduction which was satisfactory to us and after passing Russians accepted with some bantering. Russia got Rumanian oil equipment stricken from communiqué. Great Britain had Tangier knocked out, and Iran got knocked out in the meantime. Stalin said other part of communiqué so important that those matters detracted. President unable to get inland waterways in. There were some other changes in verbiage. On military talks, Stalin immediately had the words ‘in Europe’ stricken, and said he wanted that [i. e., the section on military talks] in communiqué, showing he wanted the world to think his moving in on Japan was coming.…” Cf. ante, p. 585.
36. Not found.
37. Cf. ante, p. 522.
38. Brown’s diary entry for August 1 states: “… A few minutes after midnight, papers were signed.…”
39. At 12:30 a.m., August 2. See Log, ante, p. 24.