Foreign Relations of the United States, 1946, Eastern Europe, The Soviet Union, Volume VI

874.01/2–1447

Memorandum by the Representative in Bulgaria (Barnes) to the Secretary of State⁶²

secret

[Paris,] August 23, 1946.

The decision of the Council of Foreign Ministers that the Russian Army should withdraw from Bulgaria in 90 days after peace enters into force was followed immediately by the return of General Biryusov to Sofia. He set to work at once to prepare for the riveting of a purely communistic regime onto the country prior to the departure of the Ked Army. The past two months in Bulgaria have been marked by intensified terror, by more brutal and repressive measures against the opposition and by a purge of the army and civilian administrations that have greatly worsened political conditions throughout the country.

It is believed under these circumstances, and especially in view of U.S. obligations that flow from the fact that the U.S. was a signatory to the armistice with Bulgaria and has a representative on the Allied Control Commission in Bulgaria, that the Secretary might well have a frank talk with Prime Minister Kimon Georgiev and Minister for Foreign Affairs Kulishev, pointing out to them his disappointment with conditions as they have developed in Bulgaria and the difficulties that these conditions create for him in implementing U.S. policy with respect to Bulgaria.

It is suggested that in this conversation the Secretary develop the following points and attempt to elicit responsive explanations from the Bulgarian Prime Minister and the Minister for Foreign Affairs:

1. Persistent reports reach the Secretary that the Fatherland Front is in effect no more than a facade for Communist domination of the government. These reports are given substance by what appears to have happened to War Minister Damian Veltchev;⁶³ also by the drastic purge of the Army, of other governmental establishments and of all educational institutions.

2. What are the facts about political prisoners and the allegation that 40,000 of them are now held in concentration camps and prisons? If these allegations are denied, is there any reason why the American Representative on the Allied Control Commission should not be permitted freely to inspect the prisons and the concentration camps?

3. The growing disposition of the Bulgarian Government to explain repressive acts on the grounds of obligations flowing from the Yalta agreement and the provisions of the draft treaty is of direct concern to the U.S., which cannot tolerate that its name be used to cover suppression of political liberties. At this point attached excerpt from General Robertson’s letter of July 31, to OPD expressing deep concern over conditions now obtaining in Bulgaria and the responsibility that will inevitably fall on the U.S. for these conditions if no effort is made to protest against them and to seek their correction, might be read.

4. American opinion cannot possibly comprehend the imposition of such a severe measure as the law for forced labor of so-called idlers without any provision whatever for recourse to the courts of the country. It is left entirely to the Communist Minister of Interior (this means the village militia man) to include in the term “idler” any elements not acceptable to the Communists.

5. It is equally impossible for American opinion to understand repeated decisions of the Government to suspend and suppress the Opposition press and to subject to summary arrest and trial outstanding contributors to the opposition press. It is understandable that the Government should seek to foster good relations with the USSR, and therefore to avoid unreasonable criticism of the Soviet Union, but the Government has not acted, even in an offhand manner, to restrain the government press from open and bitter criticism of the U.S. and the U.K. In this connection mention might be made of the flagrant attacks of Mr. George Dimitrov against U.S. and U.K. policy and manner of life. It should not be overlooked that U.S. still is in Armistice relations with Bulgaria.

6. Likewise it is impossible for U.S. opinion to comprehend any justification that may be put forth in explanation of political action limiting the right of the individual to work, to enjoy the opportunity to purchase food, to find shelter, to procure clothing and to receive the benefits of education in the state schools and universities. Here mention might be made of the deplorable decision that only those Bulgarians who can present a political “bill of health” from local Fatherland Front committees may pursue their education in the country’s institutions of higher learning.

7. What is the explanation of the summary expulsion of families from the capital with the obligation to turn their habitations over to the militia for occupancy by Communists coming from the provinces?

8. What of the allegation that only Communist lawyers have been appointed special examining magistrates, judges and prosecutors in connection with the application of the law “for expropriation of illegal riches” and the fact that the burden of proof in these cases is placed on the accused and does not rest on the state?

9. Widespread and persistent statements branding all opponents of the Fatherland Front as fascists, traitors and agents of international reaction, and the treatment of such people that places them in the category of inferior citizens in matters of the right to work, to have ration cards, to live where they wish, cannot be reconciled with an obligation which the Bulgarian Government would assume under the treaty to extend political and human rights without distinction to all its citizens.

10. The Government’s bills for the creation of a frontier militia and for labor mobilization of those not required for military service raises the question of the Bulgarians’ good faith in connection with the provisions of the draft treaty limiting Bulgarian military establishments.

Excerpt⁶⁴

Bulgaria is in the process of being thoroughly communized by every means short of a blood bath and I am far from sure that that is not just around the corner if it is in fact not in progress at the present time. There is no freedom of speech or press; purges in the Army, Navy and other Government agencies are in progress in a large way; purge of schools, both teachers and students is going on; expropriation of property is extensively used as a purge method as well as for obtaining needed funds; arrests, disappearances, intimidations and beatings are widespread; the Orthodox Church is under attack for failure to aid Communist activities; Free Masonry is indicted as Fascist, reactionary and treasonable. All of the foregoing add up to a reign of terror about which the world at large is as yet uninformed but of which the world will some day know. As the supreme authority in Bulgaria the ACC can be justly charged with the responsibility for these horrible conditions but against which neither General Oxley nor myself are able to move a hand. Are we, the U.S. and U.K. by our continued presence here on the ACC not laying ourselves open to charges of tacitly permitting and giving a measure of sanction to conditions?

Suggested Comment on General Robertson’s Report to War Department To Be Made to Bulgarian Prime Minister

The point raised by General Robertson is a serious one. Turning it over in my own mind, I have been reminded that the whole question of the security of peace in the Balkans has been raised by the proposal of the Ukrainian Delegate that the Security Council occupy itself with this problem.⁶⁵ I cannot overlook the fact that a referendum for the Republic in Bulgaria and elections for the Grand National Assembly that will revise the Bulgarian Constitution are contemplated while the Russian army is still in occupation in Bulgaria. It is true that Bulgaria still lives under an armistice. On the other hand, it is this very fact that renders more grave the situation referred to by General Robertson. This would not be the case were U.S. participation on the Allied Control Commission in Bulgaria more than token participation. I am sure that it will not surprise you when I tell you chat General Robertson is still officially uninformed that the Bulgarian Government contemplate holding a referendum on September 8 and elections for the Grand National Assembly on October 27. This situation leads me to wonder whether I am not now under the obligation of making a public declaration that the U.S. Delegate on the Allied Control Commission in Bulgaria will henceforth, and until the whole question of the security of peace in the Balkans has been clarified, refrain from further token participation in the activities of the so-called Commission. I expose this situation so frankly to you because I would like to hear your views on the point. I am particularly anxious to hear your views because I have heard it said that certain elements of the Bulgarian Government have already expressed grave doubts with respect to American interest in Bulgaria because no serious effort has been made by the U.S. Government to have its participation on the Allied Control Commission made real and effective.

62. The source text is included as enclosure 6 to a letter of February 14, 1947, from Barnes to the Secretary of State.
63. Telegram 623, August 13, 1946, from Sofia, reported that the press had announced that War Minister Veltchev was on “home leave” and that Prime Minister Georgiev had taken temporary charge of the Ministry. There was reliable information that Veltchev was under house arrest in an isolated Black Sea village. (874.00/8–1346)
64. This excerpt is from a letter of July 31, 1946, from General Robertson to the War Department. A copy of General Robertson’s letter was transmitted to the Department of State under cover of a memorandum of August 10, 1946, from the War Department (740.00119 Control (Bulgaria)/8–1046).
65. In a communication to the Secretary General of the United Nations dated August 24, 1946, the Ukrainian Foreign Minister proposed that the U. N. Security Council take up the Greek situation and the attendant danger to peace in the Balkans. For documentation regarding this subject, see vol. vii, pp. 194–221, passim.