Foreign Relations of the United States, 1946, Paris Peace Conference: Proceedings, Volume III

CFM Files

United States Delegation Journal

August 30, 1946, 10 a.m.

USDel (PC) (Journal) 29

The Delegation of Iran presented its views on the Peace Treaties. Emphasis was placed on Iran’s gratitude for being invited to speak and Iran’s hopes for an equitable and durable peace settlement. Iran believed that all peace-loving nations had a right to take part on an equal footing in the work of restoring and maintaining peace.

The Conference then agreed to invite the Government of Iraq to present at the next meeting its views on the Draft Peace Treaty with Italy.

M. Dragoumis (Greece) drew attention to the Greek Delegation’s letter of August 27 to the Secretary General (CP Plen. Doc. 14) which contained a draft resolution whereby the Conference would recommend that the Council of Foreign Ministers examine certain outstanding territorial questions between Greece and Albania.⁹³ He asked that this matter be placed on the agenda of the next meeting. M. Molotov (U.S.S.R.) opposed the Greek proposal⁹⁴ and took occasion to denounce the Greek Government and the activity of the Greek Delegation at the Conference. He said it was not the business of the Conference to assign tasks to the Council of Foreign Ministers but to consider the five Peace Treaties. He charged that the Greek Delegation was attempting to use the Conference in order to strengthen its own internal position and said that the Greek Government was converting Greece into a center of trouble in the Balkans. The existence of foreign troops in Greece contributed to this. M. Pijade (Yugoslavia) also spoke against the Greek proposal. He said the Conference had nothing to do with this question, which was not connected with the Peace Treaties. He took the opportunity to denounce the Greek claims against Albania and Bulgaria and said that he expected they would be followed by a territorial claim against Yugoslavia. M. Pijade’s speech was interrupted several times by Mr. Alexander (U.K.), who urged the Chairman to require the speaker to stick to the question of procedure before the meeting. Mr. Alexander then spoke himself and said that his Delegation believed that Greece certainly had a right to be heard, and therefore that the Greek draft resolution might be placed on the agenda. The merits of the question could then be debated. Mr. Byrnes said⁹⁵ that, without going into the substance of the question at all, he believed that the Conference should be liberal in permitting members to place on the agenda relevant questions. He referred to the terms of reference of the Council of Foreign Ministers, which had the power to consider the question raised by Greece. That question might be brought before them directly by Greece or in some other way. Certainly the Greek Delegation should not be barred from bringing before the Conference a proposal that the Conference itself recommend that the Council consider the question. The Polish Delegation opposed the Greek proposal on the ground that, under the Moscow Agreement, the question raised was not within the competence of the Conference. M. Moutet (France) said that the matter before the meeting was purely a question of procedure. On that question he had to admit that the work of the Peace Conference was limited to the examination of the five Draft Peace Treaties. He thought the normal procedure for the Greek Government to follow would be to bring its case directly to the Council of Foreign Ministers. M. Molotov then spoke again in the same vein as before, referring also to the presence of British troops in Greece and of American warships in the Mediterranean as a means of supporting the Greek Government in its reign of terror against the Greek people. He denounced this as intervention in the affairs of Greece. The Conference then voted on the Greek proposal,⁹⁶ which was accepted by 12 votes to 7, with 2 abstentions. The following Delegations voted in favor of the motion: U.S.A., Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Ethiopia, Great Britain, Greece, India, New Zealand, the Netherlands, and South Africa. The following Delegations voted against it: Byelorussia, France, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R., and Yugoslavia. The Belgian and Norwegian Delegations abstained.

93. The draft resolution was as follows:

    “The Plenary Conference, charged with the consideration of the Peace Treaties drawn up by the Council of Foreign Ministers, recommends that in accordance with the provisions of the Potsdam Declaration relating thereto, and in order to restore normal conditions between Greece and Albania, the Council shall examine and settle in a spirit of equity and justice certain territorial questions outstanding. These questions have acquired an urgent character as a result of the Italian Fascist aggression on Greece and the circumstances surrounding the conduct of the war against the latter country.

    The Conference also recommends that during the discussion of these questions by the Council, the representatives of Greece and Albania shall be allowed to take part in the debate.”

94. For text of Molotov’s statements at this meeting, see Molotov, Problems of Foreign Policy, p. 164.
95. Byrnes’ statement was released to the press, August 30, 1946.
96. The vote was not on the substance of the resolution, but on the matter of placing it on the agenda of the Plenary Conference.