Office of the Historian

CFM Files

United States Delegation Journal

October 1, 1946, 10 a.m.

USDel (PC) (Journal) 58

The Commission unanimously adopted the Greek amendment to Article 21 (Restitution) providing for limited replacement of non-restitutable works of art, etc., the text being the same as that approved for the Italian treaty.32 M. Politis (Greece) introduced a new amendment providing for the return of rolling stock in quantities equivalent to that removed from Greece by Bulgaria and for the eventual restitution of this rolling stock to its owners by Greece [C.P. (Gen.)Doc. 1.J.27]. He spoke of the very serious shortage of rolling stock in Greece and of its effects on the economic recovery of Greece. M. Lebel (France) and M. Bartos (Greece) [Yugoslavia] opposed the amendment on the ground that the problem should be dealt with by ECITO and stated that they would support a sympathetic consideration of the Greek position by ECITO. The amendment was rejected by 12 votes to 1, with one abstention. The Greek Delegation withdrew its amendment to Article 21 (1.J.28) [C.P.(Gen)Doc. 1.J.28], providing for the nullification of certain contracts purporting to transfer Greek property to Bulgaria. The Commission unanimously approved a Soviet proposal to modify paragraph 1 of Article 21 by adding the words “in the shortest possible time”. The Commission then unanimously adopted Article 21 as amended.

The Australian Delegation withdrew its amendments (1.B.38 and 39) [C.P. (Gen.)Doc. 1.B.38 and C.P. (Gen.)Doc. 1.B.39] to Article 22 (UN property in Rumania [Bulgaria]). The Commission unanimously adopted paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 without discussion. On the percentage of compensation, the Commission voted exactly as in the case of Rumania, i.e., it rejected full compensation by 7 votes to 6, with one abstention; it rejected 25% compensation by 9 votes to 5, and [Page 613] adopted 75% compensation by 9 votes to 4, with one abstention. The U.S. Delegation voted against full compensation and for 25% compensation and abstained on the principle of 75% compensation. The Commission then voted on the text of paragraph 4, taking the U.S. proposal (identical with text proposed for Rumania) as the basis and voting paragraph by paragraph. The voting was the same as in the case of Rumania, i.e., subparagraph (a) was approved by 9 votes to 4 with one abstention, subparagraphs (b), (c), and (d) by 9 votes to 5, and subparagraph (e) (as proposed for Rumania by French Delegation) by 8 votes to 6. The U.S. Delegation supported each subparagraph except the last. The Commission unanimously adopted paragraph 5. M. Politis moved an amendment to paragraph 6 [C.P. (Gen.)Doc. 1.J.29] by which Bulgaria would be required to permit Greek nationals with property in Bulgaria to enter Bulgaria for the administration or disposal of their property and to permit them to take their movable property and funds with them if they decided to give up their domicile in Bulgaria. He explained that Bulgaria now refused to allow Greek nationals to enter, even temporarily, to administer or dispose of their property. The U.K. representative opposed the amendment on the ground that the Greek requirements were adequately met by other provisions of the treaty and that the provision for transfer of property and funds would impose a heavy burden on Bulgaria. Although the Greek representative withdrew the latter part of the amendment, relating to transfer of property and funds, the amendment was rejected by 8 votes to 4 with two abstentions. Paragraphs 6 and 7 were then unanimously adopted. Paragraph 8 was adopted by 13 votes, the Czech Delegation abstaining.33

  1. For text, see C.P. (Plen) Doc. 31, Report of the Commission on the Draft Peace Treaty with Bulgaria, vol. iv, pp. 486, 489.↩
  2. Regarding the action of the Commission on article 22, see C.P.(Plen) Doc. 31, vol. iv, pp. 486, 490.↩