Office of the Historian

740.00119 Council/8–3046: Telegram

The Acting Secretary of State to the Secretary of State, at Paris

secret
us urgent
Washington, August 30, 1946—8 p.m.

4520. Secdel 797. For the Secretary from Acheson. Immediately following telegram contains text note delivered by Yugos Chargé to Dept this afternoon47 apparently in reply to further representations by Amb Patterson accordance urtel 4229 Aug 25.48

Meanwhile, at press conference on 27th correspondent pointed out discrepancies between Tito’s oral statement to Patterson and his written communication noting that latter contained no expression of sorrow on Tito’s part nor was there assurance that incidents would not be repeated. I replied that Tito’s message did not confirm all statements made orally and that we hoped and expected those statements would be confirmed. Today press asked whether our future action would include request for compensation and indemnity for personal injury and property loss to which I replied that it is contemplated that we will submit claim of this nature after we are in receipt of full reports in the matter.

Present note contains no expression regret, gives only ambiguous confirmation assurance concerning repetition incidents and, in stating no “satisfactory” replies received Yugos notes Aug 10 and subsequent, [Page 937] requests indication what steps we have taken to end unauthorized “intentional” flights over Yugos by American “military and civilian” planes. It charges such flights are continuing.

I would greatly appreciate instructions on procedure and substance in this Yug-plane matter. We are proceeding on basis that you are handling in Paris the ascertaining of the facts and the direction of the Dept upon steps to be taken. Our own efforts to ascertain facts from Army and Patterson have not been productive and we have hesitated to push matter at the top for fear of crossing your wires. If you wish us to prepare reply to present note for your approval we shall press Army at highest level for facts to refute these and past specific charges. While these charges are probably a subterfuge to distract attention from unresolved matters such as expression of regret, assurances against repetition, indemnity, et cetera, we believe that the reply should nevertheless demolish the charges.

Acheson
  1. Telegram 4521, Secdel 798, August 30, to Paris, not printed; for text of the Yugoslav Chargé’s note of August 30, see supra.↩
  2. See last sentence of telegram 45, August 25, 1 p.m., to Belgrade, p. 929.↩