Foreign Relations of the United States, 1946, Council of Foreign Ministers, Volume II

740.0011 EW (Peace)/10–946

The British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Bevin) to the Secretary of State

No. PC 10(72)

[Paris,] 9 October, 1946.

Dear James: You will remember that I wrote to you on the 25th September, about Dr. Wang Shih-Chieh’s letter regarding the application of the Berlin and Moscow Agreements in relation to the conclusion of a peace settlement with Germany.

I have now received letters from M. Molotov and M. Bidault, to whom I wrote at the same time, giving their views on the draft reply which I suggested we should address to Dr. Wang. I enclose copies of these letters in case you have not already received them, and will be very grateful if you would kindly let me know your views on this subject.⁵

Yours sincerely,

Ernest Bevin

[Enclosure—Translation]

The Soviet Minister for Foreign Affairs (Molotov) to the British Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs (Bevin)⁶

I have studied your letter of the 25th September in which you kindly tell me of the content of the proposed answer of the British Government to the letter of Dr. Wang Shih-chieh.

It is necessary to state that the procedure proposed by Mr. Wang Shih-chieh for the preparation of a Peace Treaty with Germany does not correspond to the procedure established by the decisions of the Berlin Conference. I share your opinion that the project of a Peace Treaty with Germany must be prepared by the representatives of Great Britain, the Soviet Union, the U.S.A. and France, as foreseen by the Berlin decisions. But I see no reasons to change this procedure when the time is approaching to call a conference for the examination of the proposed project of a treaty with Germany. It is clear from the decision of the Berlin Conference that the calling of a conference with the aim referred to above must also be delegated to the representatives of the Soviet Union, Great Britain, the U.S.A. and France as the Governments who dictated to Germany the conditions of capitulation. Such a procedure for the calling of the above mentioned conference is also laid down by the proposal of the four Governments who are conducting the military occupation of Germany. This will also correspond to procedure which the Council of Foreign Ministers followed in the preparation for and the calling of the Paris Conference. I think that it is proper to give an answer in this sense to Mr. Wang Shih-chieh.

Paris , 30 September, 1946.

5. In his letter of October 8, 1946, to Foreign Secretary Bevin, not printed, Foreign Minister Bidault stated that he had no objection to the procedure proposed by Foreign Minister Wang Shih-chieh for concluding a peace settlement with Germany. Bidault added, however, that in view of Molotov’s reply to Bevin, it did not appear possible for the Council of Foreign Ministers to reach a decision on the matter. Enclosed with Bidault’s letter to Bevin was a draft letter which the French Foreign Minister proposed to address to the Chinese Foreign Minister. Bidault’s proposed letter was identical with the letter he eventually did send to Wang Shih-chieh on October 15, 1946, a copy of which was enclosed with Bidault’s letter of the same date to Byrnes, p. 945.
6. A copy of this letter was sent to the Secretary of State by Foreign Minister Molotov on October 1, 1946; see the Secretary’s letter of November 5, 1946, to Molotov, p. 1015.