Foreign Relations of the United States, Diplomatic Papers, 1945, Europe, Volume V

740.00119 Control (Rumania)./2–2445: Airgram

The Acting Secretary of State to the American Representative in Rumania (Berry)

Washington, March 29, 1945.

A–42. The following sketch of the general lines of the Department’s thinking on the question of Transylvania, in amplification of numbered paragraph 7 of Department’s 90, February 24, may prove useful to you.

The Department did not favor the inclusion of reference to territorial questions in the armistice terms for Rumania, but the restoration of Northern Transylvania (or the major part thereof) to Rumania was one of the six points of the original armistice terms of April 1944⁴¹ which were drawn up by the Russians and to which this Government agreed without insisting on full discussion of the political aspects in view of the military advantages to be gained by the withdrawal of Rumania from the war at that moment. The reference to Transylvania in the April terms was of course a strong inducement to Rumania to surrender. The phrase “subject to confirmation at the peace settlement” was added to the original Russian draft before its transmission to the Rumanians, on the suggestion of Mr. Churchill, in which the Department concurred.⁴² This wording was kept in Article 19 of the Armistice Agreement of September 12 although in the Moscow discussions the Department proposed that the foregoing phrase be replaced by the words “deferring the definitive disposition of this territory to the peace settlement”.

In view of the wording of Article 19, the Department believes that the three principal Allies, while not committed to the restoration of Rumanian sovereignty over the whole of Northern Transylvania, must take account of that Article when the final territorial settlement is made. They are not, however, committed to the restoration of the prewar Hungarian-Rumanian boundary. It is the Department’s view that the precise location of the final boundary is a matter which should be given detailed study and on which a considered decision calculated to minimize the potentialities of the territorial issue as a disturbing factor in Hungarian-Rumanian relations, should be taken at the time peace treaties are signed with Rumania and with Hungary.

Although the Department did not agree entirely with the Soviet thesis that the determination of the time and manner of the restoration of the Rumanian administration in Northern Transylvania (reurtel 180, March 10⁴³) was a matter within the sole competence of the Soviet Government or for “negotiation between the Soviet and Rumanian Governments”, we have not desired to make an issue of this point. As a step which even the Russians, according to General Vinogradov’s statement to the Rumanian Government (your despatch no. 23, December 7, 1944⁴⁴), considered to be in implementation of Article 19 of the Armistice, we believe that it should properly have been taken by the ACC and that the American and British representatives on that body should have been consulted since all three Allied Governments have an interest in decisions which may have a bearing on the final territorial settlement. However, since the Soviet Government apparently acted without even informing its own representatives on the ACC and since it is difficult to argue that a decision of this kind should not be made by the power having primary military responsibility in the area in question, the Department has not considered it advisable to make any protest in addition to General Schuyler’s statement to Susaikov that prior notification should have been given.

In his press conference of March 12 (see Radio Bulletin of that date) the Secretary pointed out that the transfer of administration in Northern Transylvania to the Rumanian authorities was the natural implementation of Article 19 of the Armistice. He emphasized that the transfer of territory provided in Article 19 was subject to confirmation at the peace settlement, and that the change in administration leaves unchanged the legal status of the territory in question. If Susaikov’s views, as reported to the Department by Caserta, represent those of his Government, there is no difference of views among the three principal Allies on this point.

The reports of a movement for Soviet annexation of the Maramures district, described in your telegram no. 123 of February 19,⁴⁵ and your despatch no. 125 of February 22,⁴⁶ are naturally disquieting to the Department. The Department has also received various unconfirmed reports alleging that the Russians intend to return Transylvania to a Communist Hungary, to set up an independent Communist state of Transylvania, or to annex part or all of the province to the USSR. Pending the receipt of more concrete evidence of Soviet intentions, however, the Department sees no reason to question the good faith of the Soviet Government in making the pledge contained in Motolov’s public statement of April 2⁴⁷ that, the Red Army having reached the “Soviet State frontier”, the Soviet Government was “not pursuing the aim of acquiring any part of Rumanian territory”.

Grew

[President Roosevelt, in his message 218, April 1, 1945, to Marshal Stalin, had occasion to make brief reference to the tripartite agreement embodied in the Declaration on Liberated Europe and added the following: “I frankly cannot understand why the recent developments in Rumania should be regarded as not falling within the terms of that agreement. I hope you will find time personally to examine the correspondence between our Governments on this subject,” For complete text of the President’s message to Marshal Stalin, see page 194.]

41. For text of the Rumanian armistice terms proposed by the Soviet Government in April 1944 in connection with the armistice talks held in Cairo, see telegram Yugos 84, April 8, 1944, 2 p.m., from Cairo, Foreign Relations, 1944, vol. iv, p. 169.
42. The Department instructed acceptance of the military provisions of the proposed armistice, as modified by Prime Minister Churchill, in telegram Yugos 23, April 11, 1944, 10 p.m., to Cairo, ibid., p. 173.
43. Not printed; it reported that all Rumanian newspapers gave prominence to an exchange of telegrams between Stalin and Groza regarding the return of Northern Transylvania to Rumanian administration (871.014/3–1045).
44. Not printed; it transmitted the text of a letter of November 28, 1944, from the Allied Control Commission’s Acting President, General Vinogradov, to the then Rumanian Prime Minister Sanatescu, which stated that the setting up of Rumanian administration in Northern Transylvania was provided for under article 19 of the Rumanian Armistice Agreement and that the mode and timing of establishing such Rumanian administration would be solved in negotiations between the Soviet and Rumanian Governments (740.00119 Control (Rumania)/12–744).
45. See footnote 31, p. 471.
46. Not printed.
47. For text of the Soviet statement of April 2, 1944, regarding Rumania, as transmitted earlier to the Department by the Soviet Embassy, see Foreign Relations, 1944, vol. iv, p. 165.