CFM Files

United States Delegation Journal

USDel (PC) (Journal) 27

The Commission discussed a Yugoslav proposal to invite the Bulgarian Delegation to express its views orally to the Commission on the subject of the Greek-Bulgarian frontier. The Greek Delegation maintained that Bulgaria had already presented its case in the Plenary Conference74 and submitted its views in writing; therefore, according to decisions already taken it should be allowed to present its views to the Commission hereafter only on specific points. Taking into account [Page 301] the note to Article 1 of the draft treaty and document CP/Plen. 1075 which the Commission had approved, the Commission decided that Bulgaria should be invited to express its views. The question of the stage at which the Bulgarian Delegation would be heard was left for decision when the Commission should reach Article 1.

When discussion opened on paragraph 4 of the Preamble and the Australian and Yugoslav proposed amendments thereto, M. Kardelj delivered a long speech attacking the Australian Delegation for its attitude at the Conference and for the proposals which it had submitted. He accused the Australians of masking behind high-sounding words and phrases the interests of certain circles which wished to impose their will on the small nations of Europe. He said that Yugoslavia would stick to its principles regardless of how the voting went in this or that commission and would not be fooled by the pretension of Australia to represent the interests of small powers and of democracy. He thought it was natural that Australia should serve as the agent of the British Empire but objected to Australia’s assumption of the role of missionary in Europe presuming to tell European peoples about such things as human rights. M. Kardelj also spoke in praise of Bulgaria which he said was more entitled to the status of co-belligerent than was Italy. The Vice Chairman (Mr. Jordan of New Zealand) then denounced the Yugoslav Delegation for talking about everything except the motion before the meeting and chided the Chairman for allowing so much humbug. M. Novikov (USSR) took exception to Mr. Jordan’s statement, which he called offensive to the Conference and to the Yugoslav Delegation which had been entirely in order in making its statement. He felt that the Chairman acted properly in allowing the statement to be made.

Mr. Hodgson (Australian) then explained his amendment [C. P. (Gen.) Doc. 1. B. 1] which was composed of three parts:

1.
The insertion of the words “according to the principles of justice”;
2.
A proposal to defer the reference to human rights and fundamental freedoms until the article on that subject should be discussed;
3.
A drafting change transposing the phrase “will settle questions outstanding as a result of the events hereinbefore recited” and the phrase “will form the basis of friendly relations between them”.

After some discussion the Commission voted first on the Yugoslav amendment which proposed the insertion of the words “in which tendencies conforming to the principles of justice will find expression”. This amendment was rejected by 8 votes to 4 with 1 abstention. The following delegations voted against it: USA, Australia, France, Great [Page 302] Britain, Greece, India, New Zealand, South Africa. The Byelo-Russian, Czechoslovak, Ukrainian and Yugoslav Delegations voted for it. The Soviet Delegations abstained. The first point of the Australian amendment was then adopted by 12 votes to 1. Only the Yugoslav Delegation voted in the negative. No vote was taken on the third part of the Australian proposal, and the fourth paragraph of the Preamble was declared adopted with the addition of the words “conforming to the principles of justice”. The Chairman then declared that the whole Preamble was adopted.

The Commission then voted in favor of the Australian proposal to postpone consideration of the proposed addition to the Preamble referring to human rights and fundamental freedoms. The following delegations supported it: Australia, France, Great Britain, Greece, India, New Zealand, South Africa, Yugoslavia. The Byelo-Russian, Czechoslovak, Ukrainian and Soviet Delegations voted in the negative. The U.S. Delegation abstained.

  1. For text of the statement by Bulgarian Foreign Minister Kulichev at the 16th Plenary Meeting, August 14, see the extract from the Verbatim Record of that meeting, p. 200.
  2. For text, see Paris Peace Conference, 1946, p. 58.