Office of the Historian

711.00/9–2046: Telegram

The Chargé in the Soviet Union (Durbrow) to the Secretary of State

restricted
us urgent
Moscow, September 20, 1946—8 p.m.
[Received September 20—4:52 p.m.]

3532. Wallace speech has received belated but extensive coverage in [Page 784] Soviet press. Its salient points on foreign policy were accorded column and half summary September 18. These were accompanied by dispatches affirming that President had given speech full approval as in line with Byrnes’ policy, that he had later rectified his statement to indicate he meant approval only Wallace right to speak46 and that President’s prestige at home and abroad had suffered because Byrnes had compelled him to withdraw his original approval.

Wallace issue was highlighted September 20 in all Moscow papers with three column spreads of July 23 letter to President.47 Also featured was Wallace press conference announcing friendly conversation with President as result of which Wallace proposed to make no more speeches until after Paris Conference.

Department please repeat to Paris.

[
Durbrow
]
  1. See footnote 44, p. 782.↩

  2. This long, controversial letter had been written by Wallace to the President because he had been disturbed by the trend of international affairs since the end of the war. It had appeared in the press on September 18; for text, see New York Times, September 18, 1946, p. 2.

    In reporting a Pravda appraisal of September 22 of the significance of the Wallace resignation, the Chargé in telegram 3557, September 24, 1946, from Moscow, quoted in part from the article: “His resignation which came as result President’s decisions which followed one another in purely American tempo naturally means victory for Right Reactionary Wing Democratic Party. But this victory can be Pyrrhic victory because Democratic Party is clearly frittering away last remnants Roosevelt’s heritage. In any event l’affaire Wallace graphically demonstrates that present aggressive US foreign policy is not approved by broad circles of population despite manner in which monopolistic press, which least of all reflects US public opinion, describes it.” (711.00/9–2446)

    ↩