761.00/9–2446: Telegram
The Chargé in the Soviet Union (Durbrow) to the Secretary of State
[Received September 24—2:20 p.m.]
3562. Translation follows Stalin’s answers in Soviet press September 24 to questions by Sunday Times correspondent Alexander Werth in his note to Stalin of September 17:
Question: Do you believe in real danger of “new war” about which there is so much irresponsible talk throughout world at present time? What steps should be taken for prevention of war if such danger exists?
Answer: I do not believe in real danger of “new war”.
The furor about “new war” is being raised now mainly by military political reconnoiterers and their numerous supporters from ranks of civilian officials. They need this furor if only to: (a) frighten with spectre of war certain naive politicians from among their partners and thus assist their governments in wrestling greater concessions from these partners; (b) hinder for certain length of time reduction of military budgets in their countries; (c) put brake on demobilization of [Page 785] troops and thus prevent rapid growth of unemployment in their countries.
It is necessary to make strict distinction between furor about “new war”, which is being raised at present time, and real danger of “new war” which does not exist at present time.
Question: Do you consider that Great Britain and USA are deliberately creating “capitalist encirclement” of Soviet Union?
Answer: I do not think that ruling circles of Great Britain and USA could create “capitalist encirclement” of Soviet Union, even if they wanted to, which, however, I cannot assert.
Question: Speaking in words of Mr. Wallace’s recent speech, can Great Britain, Western Europe and US be assured that Soviet policy in Germany will not be turned into weapon for Russian designs directed against Western Europe?
Answer: I consider use of Germany by Soviet Union against Western Europe and USA out of question. I consider it out of question not only because Soviet Union is bound by treaty mutual aid against German aggression with Great Britain and France, and by decisions of Potsdam Conference of three Great Powers with USA, but also because a policy of utilizing Germany against Western Europe and USA would signify departure of Soviet Union from its fundamental national interests.
In short, policy of Soviet Union on German question amounts to demilitarization and democratization of Germany. I think that demilitarization and democratization of Germany are one of the most important guarantees for establishment of firm and lasting peace.
Question: What is your opinion with regard to accusations that policy of Communist Parties of Western Europe “is dictated by Moscow”?
Answer: This accusation I consider absurd—borrowed from the bankrupt arsenal of Hitler and Goebbels.
Question: Do you believe in possibility of friendly and lasting cooperation between Soviet Union and Western democracies despite existence of ideological divergencies of view, and in “friendly competition” between two systems about which Wallace spoke in his speech?
Answer: I unqualifiedly believe this.
Question: During visit of Labor Party delegation here, you, as I understand, expressed confidence in possibility of friendly relations between Soviet Union and Great Britain. What would assist establishment of these relations which are so earnestly desired by wide masses British people?
Answer: I am really confident of possibility of friendly relations between Soviet Union and Great Britain. Establishment of such relations would be greatly assisted by strengthening of political, trade and cultural ties between these countries.
Question: Do you consider that the speediest withdrawal of all American troops from China is a vital necessity for future peace?
Answer: Yes, I do.
Question: Do you believe that virtual monopolistic possession by USA of atom bomb is one of main threats to peace?
[Page 786]Answer: I do not believe atom bomb to be such a serious force as certain politicians are inclined to consider it. Atom bombs are designed to frighten the weak-nerved, but they cannot determine the outcome of war since for this atom bombs are utterly insufficient. Of course, the monopolistic possession of the secret of atom bomb creates a threat, but there exist at least two remedies against it: (a) monopolistic possession of atom bomb cannot long continue; (b) use of atom bomb will be prohibited.
Question: Do you suppose that with further advance of Soviet Union towards communism possibilities of peaceful cooperation with outside world will not be diminished, so far as Soviet Union is concerned? Is “communism in one country” possible?
Answer: I do not doubt that possibilities of peaceful cooperation not only will not diminish but may even increase. “Communism in one country” is entirely possible, especially in such country as Soviet Union.
Pouched London. Repeated Paris 373.