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

C.F.M. Files: Lot M–88: Box 2080: CFM Minutes

United States Delegation Minutes, Council of Foreign Ministers, Third Session, Twenty-Third Meeting, Waldorf-Astoria Hotel, New York, December 12, 1946, 4 p.m.⁵³

New York, December 12, 1946, 4 p.m.

secret
USDEL(CFM) (46) (NY)23rd Meeting

Approval of Records of Decisions

M. Molotov: We must approve the records of decisions of the Paris meetings, 34th through 42nd, and New York meetings, 10th through 19th.

(Approved.)

Report of the Deputies

Mr. Dunn reads:

Communication from Reparations Agency. The Deputies took note of a communication from the Chairman of the Inter-Allied Reparations Agency bringing to the notice of the Council of Foreign Ministers certain matters in connection with reparations deliveries from Germany.⁵⁴ The Deputies agreed that this letter should be placed before the Ministers for their consideration and the terms of a possible reply.

Report of Trieste Commission. A report of the Trieste Commission gave an agreed text for the description of the frontiers of Italy and the Free Territory of Trieste and Yugoslavia and the Free Territory of Trieste (CFM(NY) (46)72)⁵⁵ as well as a new text for Article 9 of the Instrument for the Provisional Regime which would consist of the last sentence of Article 9 as set forth in CFM(NY) (46)43 revised.⁵⁶ The Deputies agreed to recommend the adoption of these texts.

Settlement of Disputes for Balkan Treaties. The Deputies agreed to adopt the text of the Conference recommendations for Article 31 of the Rumanian Treaty substituting the “Secretary General of the United Nations” for the “President of the International Court of Justice” and amending the last sentence to read: “The decision of the majority of the members of the Commission shall be the decision of the Commission and shall be accepted by the parties as definitive and binding.”⁵⁷ It was also agreed that this provision would apply to the other Balkan treaties and that the last paragraph of Article 72 of the Italian Treaty should conform to the new sentence agreed above. It was pointed out in respect of the Rumanian and Finnish Treaties that this procedure for the settlement of disputes applied to Part B of Annex VI and not to Part A.

Terms of Reference for Trieste Commission of Inquiry. The following formula setting forth the terms of reference of a four-power commission to investigate the financial situation in Trieste was agreed by the French, U.K. and U.S. Deputies. The Soviet Deputy accepted the text tentatively subject to consultation with his Minister. The text reads:

[Here follows text of the terms of reference of the Trieste Commission of Inquiry included in item V of the Record of Decisions of the 133rd Meeting of the Deputies, printed supra.]

Jurists Report. The Special Committee of Jurists reported the text of a clause providing that the Free Territory should recognize the peace settlements, reading as follows:

[Here follows text quoted in item VI of the Record of Decisions of the 133rd Meeting of the Deputies, printed supra.]

It was agreed that this should be included as the final paragraph of Article 24 of the Statute.

Ninth Report of the Economic Committee, Part V.⁵⁸ In addition to the phrase in brackets⁵⁹ in Part V of this report relating to Annex 13 of the Peace Treaty with Italy, which had previously been discussed by the Deputies, the Soviet Delegation presented certain new amendments to this paragraph to insert “foreign” before “nationals of the Free Territory” and to eliminate the remainder of this sentence in the first paragraph⁶⁰ and in the next to last paragraph⁶¹ to substitute for the words “agreed upon between Italy and” the words “set up by”. The other Delegations could not accept these proposals as in their opinion such additions would aggravate the position of Italian nationals in the Free Territory.

Part VI, Technical Dispositions and Guarantees for the Free Territory. A U.S. proposal accepting the principles of the French and Soviet draft for the water supply for Gorizia and vicinity was referred to the Economic Experts for urgent study and report to the Ministers this afternoon. The remaining provisions of this annex were agreed.⁶²

Currency and Customs. The U.K. and U.S. proposals for the texts of Articles 12 and 13, as contained in Part VII of the Economic Report, were considered by the Deputies.⁶³ In the opinion of these two Delegations it is necessary to take care of these important matters upon the entry into force of the Treaty. The Soviet Deputy was of the opinion the question of currency should be considered by the four-power commission previously agreed and that Italian customs laws and regulations could remain in force temporarily. The French Delegation was of the opinion that it was necessary to provide in the Treaty for a provisional currency but thought that the customs regime could be left to be determined by the Governor and Council of Government.

Naval Report. The 17th Report of the Naval Committee⁶⁴ was unanimously adopted, the British revision having been withdrawn.

Danube Declaration. The Deputies agreed to recommend that the text of the C.F.M. agreement to call a Danube Conference, which had been approved by the Ministers at their 17th meeting on December 6,⁶⁵ should be issued in the form of a Council of Foreign Ministers’ declaration tonight. The Soviet Deputy gave his agreement subject to confirmation by his Minister.

The Deputies then discussed the final drafting of the treaties and suggested that the Ministers authorize the Secretary General at the time when delivery of the final text is made to the representatives in Washington of the signatory governments inform them that the signature of the treaties will take place in Paris on February 10 and suggest that the names of the plenipotentiaries be communicated to the French Government. The Deputies likewise suggest that the Ministers consider at what appropriate time the texts of these treaties might be made public.

Appointment of the Governor. With respect to the protocol concerning the appointment of the Governor of the Free Territory of Trieste the Deputies suggest that the C.F.M. might wish to instruct their representatives on the Security Council to meet and consider how to give effect to this protocol.

Additional Questions before the Ministers. In addition to the foregoing matters referred to the Ministers for decision the Deputies agreed that there remain outstanding on the Ministers’ agenda in connection with the peace treaties the four following items:

Signature of protocol relating to appointment of Governor

Civil Aviation—Statute and Treaties

9th Economic Report—CFM(NY) (46)71

• Part 3—Article 69—rolling stock, etc.
• Part 7—Article 11

Allocation of Italian naval vessels

Communication From Reparations Agency

Mr. Byrnes: It would be a good thing to acknowledge it and say it is impossible to consider this matter now but that we will do so at Moscow.

(Agreed.)

Report of Trieste Commission

(Agreed.)

Terms of Reference for Trieste Commission of Inquiry

(Agreed.)

Jurists Report

(Agreed.)

Settlement of Disputes for Balkan Treaties

(The wording of Article 31—Settlement of Disputes in Balkan and Finnish Treaties was adopted.)

Ninth Report of the Economic Committee

Parts V and VI⁶⁶

M. Molotov: The Soviet Delegation submitted amendments to Parts V and VI. We withdraw the amendment to V and request that the amendment to VI be accepted.

Mr. Bevin: It would be better to withdraw both.

Mr. Byrnes: It is not a good compromise. They are not good proposals and it would not be wise to withdraw only one. In Part III we have the same language as in Part VI. You will find that agreed to. This refers to property in ceded territory, and I think we ought to adopt the same language for the Free Territory as applies to ceded territory.

Mr. Bevin: If we take out the bracketed words and your two amendments, we have a good article.

M. Molotov: These are in contradiction to other decisions of ours. Mr. Byrnes refers to Annex III. This deals with ceded territory. The Free Territory is not ceded and the same decisions cannot be applied. On the other hand we have adopted a statute for the Free Territory. Article 6 says that the right to opt for Italian citizenship is provided for in the Constitution. This amendment is in conformity with our decision. Without the amendment there will be contradiction with our decisions. I propose that the sentence read “removal of property to Italy will be effected under conditions which will be laid down in the Constitution of the Free Territory of Trieste”. This language will be in conformity with the approved language.

Mr. Byrnes: I do not see the connection with citizenship. We set up the Free Territory. We provide that Italians in Yugoslavia can opt for Italian citizenship and removal of his property will be provided for by agreement between Italy and Yugoslavia, but if a man in Trieste opts for citizenship you say that removal of his property will be effected under conditions laid down in the Constitution. We don’t give this man equal opportunity.

M. Molotov: There is a difference between Yugoslavia and the Free Territory. Yugoslavia has its own laws, whereas the Free Territory has a statute approved by the Security Council. The positions are different. In one case we have national law and in the case of the Free Territory we have a regime and statute established by the Security Council. This is not analogous. Unless we correct Article 6 of Annex 13, there will be contradiction with the article on citizenship. Both articles relate to persons who opt for Italian citizenship. Otherwise we shall have two different languages.

Mr. Bevin: I can’t see that. One refers to the right to opt. This relates to property. I can’t see the conflict at all. If you leave your words in, the opter in the Free Territory is in worse position than the opter from the ceded territory.

M. Molotov: The connection is obvious. The two articles deal with option for Italian nationality and conditions thereof. The substance of these questions is, if we let this matter become a subject of dispute between Italy and the Free Territory there will be many disputes. It will bring about disruption of economic life. We want to secure the life there. The Governor will see to it that nothing contrary to the statute will be permitted.

M. Couve de Murville: Could we say that conditions of removals will be fixed by the government of the Free Territory with the approval of the Governor. I prefer the first formula, but if we add “approved by the Governor” I think we would guarantee and provide a safeguard.

M. Molotov: This is contrary to Article 6.

Mr. Bevin: I can’t see that.

M. Molotov: Article 6 states clearly that the Constitution of the Free Territory provides for the opting for Italian citizenship on conditions laid down in the Constitution and not on conditions laid down between Italy and the Free Territory or approved by the Governor. M. Couve de Murville’s suggestion is in contradiction.

Mr. Bevin: This is paragraph 2 on citizenship. There is nothing about the constitution in this paragraph.

M. Molotov: You haven’t the amended text.

Mr. Byrnes: You can’t write into the constitution these property rights. These rights are fixed by the two countries concerned. If the language in the report was adopted, the Free Territory would be protected, for it must agree on the conditions with Italy. It wouldn’t have to agree unless the conditions were satisfactory. Under the statute we have provided that such an agreement will be signed by the Governor and a member of the Council. Therefore, the Free Territory has control in making any agreement with Italy. I think M. Couve de Murville’s suggestion is satisfactory, but I think the original language fully protects the Free Territory.

M. Molotov: Could we agree on this compromise “removal of property to Italy will be effected under conditions which will not be in contradiction to the Constitution and in a manner which will be agreed upon by the Free Territory and Italy”?

(Agreed.)

Mr. Bevin: We take out the brackets in the first paragraph.

M. Molotov: Brackets should be kept, but I withdraw the amendment to the last paragraph. We shouldn’t have too broad an interpretation. I am ready to remove the brackets and also the suggested words. We adopt Part V in language acceptable to the U.S., U.K. and France. Part VI has an amendment in the second paragraph. The same amendment should be made in the last paragraph.

Water Supply for Gorizia

M. Molotov: There is an agreed text, CFM 75, which has been adopted.⁶⁷

Terms of Reference for Trieste Commission of Inquiry, Article 11

M. Molotov: It would be well for us to confine ourselves to the Commission on which we have reached agreement.

Mr. Byrnes: The other day I suggested adding the person appointed by the Secretary General of U.N.O.

M. Molotov: This is our affair at the present time since our four governments have been dealing with this matter. Subsequently it will have to be taken up by the Council.

Mr. Byrnes: We are asking U.N.O. to help us finance the Free Territory. I withdraw insisting on my proposal since this Commission will report on the situation between now and the end of 1947, and we will have another occasion to discuss the matter.

(Agreed.)

Currency and Customs

M. Molotov: Article 12.⁶⁸ That should await the report.

Mr. Byrnes: This is a different story. No report will produce the currency. When the Free Territory is established, if there is no provision for currency there will be confusion. We have a responsibility. We should provide that Italian currency be legal tender. If you don’t want to do that, make some other provision. It must be written in the treaty as it places an obligation on Italy to supply it.

M. Molotov: As long as there is no decision on this, former methods will apply. That is why I say no new decision is needed.

Mr. Byrnes: We can’t leave it to Italy to decline to furnish currency and foreign exchange needs. They might decline and we can’t leave it to them. Italy is required to supply foreign exchange and currency under conditions no less favorable than those in Italy.

M. Molotov: Can we agree to accept this—keep the initial part of the article up to “Free Territory” and delete the rest. The last sentence remains in. The Soviet Delegation would not be able to go beyond the limits which I have indicated. Perhaps the French Delegation will agree.

M. Couve de Murville: We believe that something should be in the statute on currency since certain obligations must be placed on Italy. I think your proposal is all right.

M. Molotov: Paragraph 2 is deleted.

Mr. Bevin: You provide for currency from Italy and yet no agreement is foreseen. I could agree to your amendment, but I should have to have the second paragraph in.

M. Molotov: I would like to take a step forward. Delete all after “two governments”.

Mr. Bevin: All right. Could we say “which may be required”?

(Agreed.)

M. Molotov: Article 13.⁶⁹ Perhaps the Soviet proposal can be accepted. It is short but adequate.

Mr. Bevin: No. There are no customs laws or regulations because it still is Italian territory. The provision is too short and too sweet. Better to use the U.S.–U.K. proposal supported by the French.

M. Molotov: This is a complicated question. The proposal was presented recently to us. We have no experts. It is hard to express our views.

Mr. Byrnes: It was presented September 26, offered in Paris and I hope the Soviet Delegation can agree so we can get rid of it. It never was discussed, but it was before a subcommittee on September 26.

M. Molotov: We didn’t study or discuss it.

Mr. Byrnes: Our experts called your attention to it.

M. Molotov: In any case the attention of the C.F.M. was not called to it.

Mr. Byrnes: We’ve got to do something along this line. We must have a compromise proposal.

M. Molotov: I can’t reply tonight. It is complicated and must be studied.

Ninth Report of the Economic Committee

M. Molotov: I have one more point on the 9th Report of the Economic Experts regarding rolling stock and Italian ships.⁷⁰ This is in addition to an agreed article. The addition is unacceptable to the Soviet Delegation.

Mr. Byrnes: I understand you to say the article was agreed.

M. Molotov: Yes, with the exception that those two paragraphs were not agreed. If we go on, we shall invent many more new paragraphs. I ask this shall not be insisted on and that we keep Article 69 in its final form.

Mr. Bevin: Does M. Molotov hold that this article as agreed covers merchant vessels, rolling stock, etc.?

M. Molotov: It covers in part by what was agreed to, not in full. What was adopted is enough. If we intend to finish, we must not increase the number of new questions.

Mr. Bevin: All we want to do is to make sure that Italian rolling stock used by UNRRA, and ships, be not seized. If you agree that they shall not be seized, it can go to the Ambassadors with that knowledge. I think that the Soviet contention is covered by paragraph D in Article 69. If you agree that this point is covered, we can advise our Ambassadors to that effect.

M. Molotov: Paragraph D is enough.

Mr. Bevin: Is this agreed among us that D covers rolling stock and ships?

M. Molotov: I don’t propose to place any interpretation of my own on paragraphs of the treaty.

Mr. Byrnes: The question arises then that if the two paragraphs are not included, Italy would feel that on the day the treaty took effect their railroad cars or ships would be seized. I do not think M. Molotov is right. His interpretation would [not?] be sufficient. It is not a complicated question. If our intent is to protect Italy, we ought to keep it in the treaty.

M. Molotov: What paragraph D says is enough. As to further changes in Article 69, the Soviet Delegation won’t agree to them as the article was agreed to long ago. Italy’s interests are sufficiently protected by Article 69. Everyone is short of railroad cars, so new ones will have to be built. Such is the state of affairs in Europe.

Mr. Byrnes: That is what makes it important.

M. Molotov: Let us envisage another meeting of the Council to discuss it. There are no experts here to discuss it.

Mr. Byrnes: We don’t need experts. All we need to say is whether Italy’s rolling stock is included in property rights or if we don’t want to make that an interpretation, then to put in this language so that we remove temptation.

Mr. Bevin: I understand the French Delegation proposed the rolling stock and we the shipping. It is a combined effort of the Western Bloc. I rely on 69.

Report of the Naval Committee

M. Molotov: Report was agreed to by our Deputies.

(Agreed.)

Danubian Declaration

M. Molotov: There is a proposal of the Deputies to publish a declaration of the Four Ministers before midnight.

(Agreed.)

Publication of the Text of the Treaties in the Press

Mr. Byrnes: The United States Deputy suggests the day after the texts are presented to the representatives of the various governments in Washington.

(Agreed.)

Appointment of the Governor

M. Molotov: The next item is the signature of the protocol regarding the appointment of the Governor⁷¹ and the request that the representatives of the four governments and the Security Council should get together in the near future to consider a nominee for the Governor. As for the protocol, it meets with no objection, and I understand it is approved by us. Then we shall instruct our representatives on the Security Council to exchange views as to the candidate for Governor in the near future.

(Agreed.)

Description of Frontiers and Budget for the Provisional Regime

Mr. Bevin: There are two points on the Deputies Report which we have not formally confirmed. One is the description of the frontiers of the Free Territory in the agreed text and the other is the provisional budget, Article 9. They were agreed by the Deputies.

(Both agreed to.)

Civil Aviation

M. Molotov: And still we revert again to Civil Aviation. There is no getting away from it. And so I suggest that we do not raise disputes as regards civil aviation or else we shall not leave on board the ship. The suggestion of the Soviet Delegation as regards landing for repair is that we add the relevant words not at the end of the paragraph in the Italian Treaty but in the middle, “Italy shall grant no exclusive or discriminatory right to any country with regard to the operation of civil aircraft in international traffic, shall afford all the United Nations equality of opportunity in obtaining international commercial aviation rights in Italian territory, including the right of refueling and repair and with regard to the operation of civil aircraft in international traffic, and shall grant on a reciprocal and non-discriminatory basis to all United Nations the right to fly over Italian territory. These provisions shall not effect the interests of the national defense of Italy.”

Mr. Bevin: To make it quite clear, you should say “including the right to land for refueling and repair”.

M. Molotov: All right.

(Agreed.)

M. Molotov: That language is to go in all the treaties and in the Statute for the Free Territory.⁷²

(Agreed.)

Annex III, Part 5, Italian

Treaty Soviet Amendment⁷³

M. Molotov: It remains for us to consider Annex III of the Italian Treaty in which there has been a Soviet amendment to Part 5. The Soviet Delegation withdraws the amendment.

Agenda for Next Session of the C.F.M.

M. Molotov: Can we now approve the text of the next session, the text that has been agreed by the Deputies?⁷⁴

(Agreed.)

Italian Warships

M. Molotov: The Soviet Delegation expects that someone will make a conciliatory proposal on this subject.

Mr. Bevin: I take it, Mr. Chairman, that on this allocation the ships that we lent will be returned. I want to make a conciliatory proposal on A, B and C. We would be content with C.⁷⁵

Mr. Byrnes: I stated the position of the United States when we last discussed it.

M. Molotov: I understand the American Delegation takes no particular interest in any of these groups, A, B and C.

Mr. Byrnes: “A” stands for American. We have undertaken to help straighten out this situation and to take care of the Netherlands and Brazil out of A so that when it is through, the United States will end up with much less tonnage than is now indicated.

M. Molotov: I have no doubt that both Brazil and the Netherlands can be satisfied out of B.

Mr. Bevin: It took us a long time to capture them.

M. Molotov: All right, you don’t agree?

Mr. Bevin: What is the settlement?

M. Molotov: The settlement is that made by you.

Mr. Bevin: There is a point on submarines I want to mention—whether the subs retained for experimental purposes shall be sunk after two years.⁷⁶

M. Molotov: The Soviet Delegation believes this can be trusted to our naval people.

Mr. Bevin: This point arose because we agreed at Potsdam that certain submarines should be sunk.⁷⁷ Our Admiralty advises the submarines were captured and weren’t sunk. They want to make sure if they handed these things over they would be sunk. It appears that after the Berlin Conference there was a Tripartite Naval Commission and it agreed that German ships and craft listed in Category C and all unallocated submarines should be destroyed.⁷⁸ Then they should have been destroyed in February. General Brownjohn raised the question in Berlin. They had no report of the Tripartite Commission carrying out that agreement.

M. Molotov: It is an entirely different matter. The Berlin decision did not raise the question of sinking experimental submarines allocated to the four states. The only ships that were to be sunk were above that category of submarines.

Mr. Bevin: You are right. I won’t press that. I would rather you kept two old ones than have two new ones.

The other point I want to raise in this connection is that we should give instructions to the Naval Committee for all remaining points, leaving the Deputies to draft the form of our protocol in accordance with Article 48, 1(e) of the Italian Treaty.

Mr. Byrnes: The United States thinks that there should be instructions as to what should go into the protocol. I have a paper which has been prepared by our representative on the Naval Committee. First, that the Naval Committee should continue to meet under the authority of the C.F.M. until the date of the entry into force of the Italian treaty. The opinion of the United States representative is that it would not be necessary to have but very few meetings, one meeting after we adjourn here in order that the protocol be agreed upon. The draft protocol to be presented to the Ministers should cover the following points:

(a) Establishment of a quadripartite Naval Commission to handle the details of the disposal of excess Italian Navy.

(b) The above Commission to operate under the Council of Foreign Ministers until the date of entry into force of the Italian Treaty and thereafter in Rome under the Italian Ambassador [under the Four Ambassadors?]. I am advised that it will require several months to complete the task of disposing of the surplus units.

(c) Provision requiring that submarines allocated to Big Four for experimental purposes (2 each) shall be sunk within two years of receipt.

(d) Provision that U.S.S.R. must return ships on loan to her from U.S. and U.K. concurrently with transfer of Italian ships to the U.S.S.R.

I understand that the agreement during the war was that after the war there should be a discussion as to and a settlement of the status of those ships, and I think that that should be arranged by the Naval Committee at this time.

I think the Naval Committee should be instructed to prepare a protocol and I ask that in doing so they consider and include the proposals that I have made.

M. Molotov: Have you among your proposals the proposal to sink two submarines?

Mr. Byrnes: Yes.

M. Molotov: I just heard Mr. Bevin withdraw his objection.

Mr. Byrnes: I understood Mr. Bevin was referring to what happened at Potsdam as to German submarines. What I am proposing is that of the Italian submarines that are now allotted that there should be provision for discussion of the Ministers at some subsequent meeting to determine the matter of the disposition of experimental submarines. Or let us discuss it now.

M. Molotov: I take it that we have more or less reached agreement on this point. If this is not so, I will repeat the observations I made before. The Berlin conference decided that all German submarines should be sunk save for those which are allotted for experimental purposes and what I suggest is that this decision of the Berlin conference regarding the submarines for experimental purposes be extended to those from the Italian navy. That is to say, those submarines for experimental purposes should not be sunk just as the German submarines were not sunk. The decision of the Berlin conference says that the greater part of the German submarine fleet, not more than 30 submarines should be preserved and divided equally between the U.S.S.R., the U.K., U.S. and France, for experimental and technical purposes, and I suggest that we act in the same manner as regards the two Italian submarines which each of our states is to receive.

Mr. Byrnes: As far as the United States is concerned if provisions of the German treaty provide a certain number for experimental purposes which should not be sunk, I think a similar provision should be made here and I am willing to discuss with my colleagues how many should be allowed. As I understand, two have been allotted to each, and it would be agreeable to me to say that those two should not be sunk.

(Agreed.)

Mr. Byrnes: Would the Council care to discuss now the question of returning the ships that were lent so that we can settle this?

Mr. Bevin: M. Molotov agreed.

Mr. Byrnes: He did? Well, I have no other suggestion to make to the Committee. We should provide for the establishment of the Naval Committee to handle the details of disposing of this navy.

(Agreed.)

Mr. Bevin: Would it be convenient for the draft protocol to be presented to the Deputies in London.

Mr. Byrnes: Can’t we decide some other disposition. I do not think it would be wise to present it to the Deputies who will be charged with the German question. Why should not the protocol be presented to the four governments?

(Agreed.)

Mr. Bevin: We have agreed to the distribution and I do sincerely hope that the actual names of the ships allocated should not appear in the press.

(Agreed.)

Mr. Bevin: We ought to put in the protocol that Italy is to sign that she is responsible for the safe transfer of these ships.

(Agreed.)

Mr. Bevin: There is one other matter. We have not replied to the Dutch Government. We have drafted a letter which can go to the Naval Committee, and we can sign it, which explains to the Dutch Government that it has not been found possible to make the allocation desired by the Netherlands Government and that we have agreed to the measure of compensation to the Netherlands Government which would be made by the governments of the United States and the United Kingdom jointly. I wonder if the Council would allow Mr. Byrnes and me to consult on the actual draft of the letter, because I know the United States Constitution prohibits it.

M. Molotov: We do not object.

Mr. Byrnes: I think we can ask that certain language be included in the protocol that would help us take care of it. It would be helpful to us in making a transfer without having to enact legislation.

Currency and Customs

I have one thing more I would like to mention. This afternoon we had a proposal that I hoped would be a compromise on the matter of the customs of the Free Territory and M. Molotov said he would have to have time to look into it. It was a new proposal. Could we have some arrangement so that when you look into it and conclude that you can agree to it, you advise the Secretary General or the deputies so they can include it in the treaty. The Drafting Committee will be working tomorrow, and I think that after you have had an opportunity to read this proposal, you would agree that it is essential that something be done pending the appointment of the gentlemen of the Council of Government. The reason I urge it is that in the report of the deputies was this statement: “The Soviet Deputy was of the opinion that the question of the currency should be considered by the Four-Power commission previously agreed to and that Italian customs laws and regulations could remain in force temporarily.” Now if we agree that they should remain in force temporarily, that is all right for us to agree upon, but if we don’t put it in the treaty, Italy would have different ideas or certainly there isn’t any requirement upon the Italian Government to see that they are continued. It seems to me that if we think that is wise, then we ought to write in there that the “Italian customs laws and regulations should remain in force temporarily”, and therefore that is what we have placed in our compromise proposal.

M. Molotov: Let us keep it as it was and put a full stop after. The second part touches upon a very complicated matter which the Soviet Delegation is not ready at the present to decide.

Mr. Bevin: Do you want to say at the end “the Italian customs laws and regulations shall remain in force pending their revision in accordance with Article 10 and no customs barriers shall be created between Italy and the Free Territory”.

M. Molotov: Yes.

Mr. Bevin: Does this meet it “the Italian customs laws and regulations shall temporarily remain in force pending their revision in accordance with Article 10 of this instrument and pending such revision no customs barriers shall be created between Italy and the Free Territory”.

Mr. Byrnes: I agree with that.

M. Molotov: No. I agree to what your first sentence says, but to nothing else.

Mr. Byrnes: I have another one. After the first sentence could we agree upon adding this “during the period the Italian customs laws and regulations remain in force in the Free Territory, Italy shall impose no customs duties on goods produced in the Free Territory”.

(Remains unagreed.)

M. Molotov: It seems to me that we have finished our work. This being so, permit me as Chairman of the present meeting to congratulate the members of the Council of Foreign Ministers on finishing a long and hard work in drafting the five peace treaties.

(M. Molotov went on to thank the American Government and Mr. Byrnes for their hospitality. Mr. Bevin and M. Couve de Murville added their gratitude and hopes for the meeting in Moscow and Mr. Byrnes replied.)

The meeting adjourned at 8:20.

53. For a list of persons present at this meeting, see the Record of Decisions, infra.
54. For text of the communication under reference, dated October 8, 1946, see enclosure 1, p. 1562.
55. The document under reference is not printed. The descriptions of the frontiers set forth therein were subsequently included as articles 4 and 22, respectively, of the final Treaty of Peace with Italy.
56. Ante, p. 1416.
57. For the revised text of the article under reference here, see item III of the Record of Decisions of the 133rd Meeting of Deputies, supra.

58. Point (or Part) 5 of CFM(46) (NY)71, December 11, 1946, the 9th Report of the Committee of Economic Experts, not printed, set forth proposed texts for articles 5 and 6 of Annex XIII of the Draft Peace Treaty with Italy dealing with the economic and financial provisions relating to the Free Territory of Trieste. Addendum 2 to CFM(46) (NY)71, which contained Soviet amendments to these paragraphs 5 and 6, is not printed. The texts of articles 5 and 6 as proposed by the Committee of Economic Experts are quoted below. (A footnote in the source text after the bracketed phrase in article 5 reads as follows: “The U.K. and U.S.A. representatives are opposed to the inclusion of the words in brackets.”)

    “5. The property, rights and interests of Italian nationals who became domiciled in the Free Territory of Trieste after June 10, 1940 and of persons who opt for Italian citizenship pursuant to the Statute for the Free Territory of Trieste [and remain in the Free Territory] shall, provided they have been lawfully acquired, be respected in the same measure as the property, rights and interests of nationals of the Free Territory generally for a period of three years from the coming into force of the Treaty.

    “The property, rights and interests within the Free Territory of other Italian nationals and also of Italian juridical persons, provided they have been lawfully acquired, shall be subject only to such legislation as may be enforced from time to time regarding the property of foreign nationals and juridical persons generally.

    “6. Persons who opt for Italian nationality and move to Italy shall be permitted, after the settlement of any debts or taxes due from them in the Free Territory of Trieste, to take with them their movable property and transfer their funds, provided such property and funds were lawfully acquired. No export or import duties will be imposed in connection with the moving of such property. Further they shall be permitted to sell their movable and immovable property under the same conditions as nationals of the Free Territory.

    “The removal of property to Italy will be effected under conditions and within the limits agreed upon between Italy and the Free Territory.

    “The conditions and the time-periods of the transfer of the funds, including the proceeds of sales, shall likewise be agreed.”

59. i.e., the brackets in the first paragraph of article 5.
60. i.e., the first paragraph of article 5.
61. i.e., the second paragraph of article 6.
62. Under consideration here was point 6 of CFM(46) (NY)71, the 9th Report of the Committee of Economic Experts; in this connection, see also item VII of the Record of Decisions of the 133rd Meeting of the Deputies, supra.
63. The proposals under reference here were those included under point 7 of CFM(46) (NY)71, not printed.
64. CFM(46) (NY)65, December 9, 1946, p. 1491.
65. The text of the Danube Declaration is included as Annex 5 to the Record of Decisions of the 129th Meeting of the Deputies, December 6, 1946, p. 1446. See also item I, 4, of the Record of Decisions of the 17th Meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers, December 6, 1946, p. 1462.
66. Under consideration here is the 9th Report of the Committee of Economic Experts (CFM(46) (NY)71), point 5, setting forth proposed articles 5 and 6 of Annex XIII of the Draft Peace Treaty with Italy, dealing with economic and financial provisions relating to Trieste.
67. CFM(46) (NY)75, December 12, 1946, not printed, contained a redraft of Annex IX, Part A of the Draft Peace Treaty with Italy, concerned with the technical dispositions of the Free Territory of Trieste. The text was ultimately included in the final Treaty of Peace with Italy as a separate annex, Annex V.
68. The proposed article 12 of the Instrument for the Provisional Regime of the Free Territory of Trieste as included under point 7 of the 9th Report of the Committee of Economic Experts (CFM(46) (NY)71) is not printed. This article, as amended during this Council meeting, was included as article 11 of Annex VII of the Treaty of Peace with Italy.
69. The proposed article 13 of the Instrument for the Provisional Regime of the Free Territory of Trieste as included under point 7 of CFM(46) (NY)71 is not printed.
70. Point 3 of the 9th Report of the Committee of Economic Experts (CFM(46) (NY)71) set forth additional sub-paragraphs to paragraph 5 of article 69 of the Draft Peace Treaty with Italy. For the texts of these sub-paragraphs, see footnote 10, p. 1514.
71. For the protocol under reference here, see p. 1558.
72. For the agreed text of the article under reference and the identification of the article in the various draft treaties, see item XIII of the Record of Decisions of this Council meeting, infra.
73. For the text of the Soviet amendment referred to here, see document CFM(46) (NY)30, November 26, 1946, p. 1296.
74. The text under reference was circulated to the Council as CFM(46) (NY)74, December 12, 1946, p. 1557.
75. Under consideration here was CFM(46)250, August 5, 1946, not printed, the 13th Report on the Work of the Naval Committee, which included a table showing the recommended distribution of excess Italian naval units. The Committee had been unable to agree on the allotment as between the United States, the Soviet Union, and the United Kingdom, of the naval units listed in columns marked A, B, and C. The ships named in columns A, B, and C are enumerated in footnote 25, p. 1455.
76. In its 13th Report (CFM(46)250, August 5, 1946), the Naval Committee indicated that agreement had been reached on the allocation of submarines for experimental purposes in accordance with the following distribution: United States—Dandolo and Platino; Soviet Union—Marea and Nichelio; United Kingdom—Atropo and Alagi; France—Giada and Vertice. United States and United Kingdom agreement on this allocation was contingent upon a requirement that all submarines be sunk in deep water not more than 2 years from the date of taking over by the Power concerned. The Soviet Union was opposed to the establishment of any time limits restricting the duration of experiments with submarines, and France agreed that if a time for disposal was imposed it should be 2 years. (CFM Files, Lot M–88, Box 2061, CFM Documents)
77. For the agreement of the Berlin Conference regarding the disposal of the German submarine fleet, see item IV, A, 3, of the Protocol of Proceedings of that Conference, Foreign Relations, The Conference of Berlin (The Potsdam Conference), 1945, vol. ii, p. 1487.
78. For the Report of the Tripartite Naval Commission, December 6, 1945, see Foreign Relations, 1945, vol. iii, p. 1506.