Office of the Historian

860C.00/12–1945: Telegram

The Ambassador in Poland (Lane) to the Secretary of State

Warsaw, December 19, 1945—midnight.
[Received December 21—3:15 p.m.]

693. Deptel No. 346, Dec. 13, 7 p.m. I talked to Mikolajczyk last evening re limitations of six parties. Mikolajczyk agrees that action of National Council of Homeland was unconstitutional and was contrary to letter and spirit of Yalta decision. He likewise agreed that if this action were allowed to pass without protest encouragement would be given for further limitation of parties by arbitrary action of Council.

Mikolajczyk said, however, that while he agreed in principle with our views he was fearful that if the Council should accept our protest and rescind its act of limitation Govt might create formation of further number of parties to draw votes from Mikolajczyk’s party. Mikolajczyk said, however, that he is confident if elections are fair his party has an ample majority regardless of formation of other parties.

The fact that it may be to Mikolajczyk’s own interest that there is a limitation of parties should not in my opinion deter us from expressing our views on a matter of principle. I feel we should at all costs avoid the impression that we are backing Mikolajczyk. Such an impression of course would not be warranted but if allowed to circulate would react against the interests of Mikolajczyk’s party.

I informed Mikolajczyk that I intended to call on President Bierut prior to Dec 29 when next meeting of Council takes place and express our views. He interposed no objection.

Report on remainder of my conversation follows in my telegram 694, Dec 19, 1 p.m.12

I have shown above to British Ambassador who says that in view of our intention to confine our protest to an oral statement he will also request audience with Bierut and if not deliver note (mytel 654, Dec 12, 1 p.m.13).

Lane
  1. Infra.↩
  2. Not printed; it reported, inter alia, that the British Ambassador had shown Ambassador Lane a draft note to the Polish Foreign Ministry which he proposed to deliver under instructions from London protesting the limitation imposed upon the number of political parties; the British Ambassador was deferring delivery of the note until Ambassador Lane received instructions from the Department to take parallel action (860C.00/12–1245).↩