868.00/5–2746
Memorandum of Telephone Conversation by Mr. William O. Baxter of the Division of Near Eastern Affairs
Mr. Pares telephoned today to report the information contained in a telegram just received from the Foreign Office. Mr. Tsaldaris, Prime Minister of Greece, recently asked the British Ambassador to Greece for the views of the British Government on the form of the forthcoming plebiscite; that is, whether it should be merely on the return of King George II or whether it should be a referendum on the form of government,—monarchy vs. republic. The British Ambassador said that he would refer the matter to London but that in his personal view he felt that a referendum on the monarchy question alone would be inconclusive, as another referendum would be necessary in order to apply the principle.
The Foreign Office has now indicated its approval of the British Ambassador’s attitude, pointing out that, although the question to be decided by a plebiscite is the concern of the Greek Government, it had always been the understanding of the British Government that the Greek people were to be consulted as to whether the King should return and were not to be asked to decide upon a form of government.
[Page 167][On May 31, 1946, two reports on Greek frontier problems were prepared by Mr. Harry N. Howard of the Division of International Organization Affairs and were given control numbers PIO–563 and PIO–564. The former was entitled “The Problem of the Greek-Bulgarian Frontier”; the latter, “The Greek Claim to Northern Epirus”. Both reports were in the nature of historical reviews of the problems covered and analyses thereof.
PIO–563 recommended:
PIO–564 recommended:
“The United States should not commit itself at this time to any specific position as to the questions at issue in the Greek territorial claims in Northern Epirus. Nevertheless, it is felt, on the basis of studies made in the Department, that while the Greeks may have some title historically to the territory in question, there is at the present time, because of shifts in population and new methods of warfare, little justification on either ethnic or strategic grounds for anything more than a minor adjustment in behalf of Greece in the Southwestern corner of the disputed area opposite the island of Corfu.
As regards placing this question on the agenda of the Council of Foreign Ministers, the American Representative should not sponsor it … but he should not oppose its inclusion if the Greeks insist.
If the Council accepts the Greek claim as an item on the agenda, the American Representative, without taking the lead, should support a thorough-going investigation of the Greek-Albanian frontier problem.
The Greek government did not seek the advice of the United States Government in connection with its petition to the Council. If the advice of this government is sought with respect to the matter, the Greek government might well be asked whether it had considered fully the various complex political issues which might be raised at this time and the chain of events which might be started as a result of this action.”
The Secretary of State transmitted copies of the two reports to Athens, for the information of the Officer-in-Charge, in instruction 924, July 24 (868.014/7–2446).]