740.00119 Control (Bulgaria)/6–2747: Telegram

The Acting Representative in Bulgaria (Horner) to the Secretary of State


479. Following is text of memorandum adopted following meeting held Sofia June 23 to consider question of enforcement of military clauses of peace treaty with Bulgaria. Participants were Sterndale [Page 16] Bennett (UK political representative), Major General Oxley (UK representative ACC), General Robertson (US representative ACC), Colonel Green (UK MA designate), Colonel Yatsevitch (US MA designate) and myself. Text of memorandum is being telegraphed by Robertson to War Dept1 and by British to UK FonOff and War Ministry. Dept’s views and instructions re matter would be appreciated, while in view similarities of problems in three ex-satellites comments of missions Bucharest and Budapest would be useful:2

Meeting held June 23 between heads US and British military and political missions to discuss implementation military clauses peace treaty.
Agreement first reached on certain basic propositions.
That Bulgarian Govt had no intention carrying out treaty in any important particular.
That Bulgarian Prime Minister had made it abundantly clear that Bulgaria had no intention allowing heads of missions to function under Article 35 as control commission.
That British and US representatives in Bulgaria, Hungary and Rumania cannot count on Soviet support in countering satellite policy of evasion.
That British and US representatives in all three countries should have coordinated instructions for application in all three countries on certain questions of basic policy and interpretations and should know extent to which they will be supported by their govts in efforts secure effective treaty enforcement.
That discussions on treaty implementation with Soviet representatives have hitherto centered around procedural questions with completely negative results; and that it would be major tactical error for Council of Ministers under Article 35 to start with discussions of procedure and organization.
That US and British representatives should take offensive on certain questions of major policy and endeavor to keep initiative.
Immediately important point on which guidance from US and British Govts was required were held to be:3 [Page 17]
Unlimited and individual freedom for US, British and Soviet diplomatic representatives together with such members of their staffs as they might designate to travel within country concerned including complete freedom access all military or other establishments and installations without prior notice of intention to visit or inspect. Without such freedom of movement effective enforcement impossible. If on other hand it is obtained it may also be useful indirectly in connection with question of Bulgarian Greek frontier.4
Agreement on definition “armed forces” having regard to fact that in organs such as militia, frontier guards, labor battalions (trudovaks) and volunteer labor brigades some form of military instruction forms part of normal routine.
Agreement on scale of equipment considered reasonable for maintenance authorized armed forces without risk creating skeleton armies capable rapid expansion by induction of manpower trained in official or non-official para-military organs.
It agreed to recommend that first stage in US and British tactics should be to ask for ad hoc meeting of Council of Ministers immediately after R–Day and to propose:
Communication to Bulgarian Govt requiring latter to submit statement within fixed time showing present strength armed forces in personnel and material including complete order of battle together with plan showing manner in which Bulgarian Govt proposes to implement military clauses treaty.
Demand for recognition by Bulgarian Govt of right unlimited travel as outlined in paragraph 3 (a) above.
Interval while statement and plan in paragraph 4 (a) above were being prepared could be utilized in discussions on questions raised in paragraph 3 (b) and (c) above and in working out questions of procedure preparatory to second stage which would be discussion and verification of Bulgarian statement and plan.
Demand for right of unlimited travel will undoubtedly meet with opposition from Russians on ground that security Russian troops involved during 90-day period. During this period it unlikely that effective inspections will be possible in 25-kilometer security zone along Greek-Turkish frontier. If necessary, we think we should accept Russian stipulation if made for notice of visits while Bulgaria remains area of Soviet high command, as this will strengthen our hand in demanding unlimited free movement after Russian withdrawal.
Meeting felt it important to have guidance from US Govt and His Majesty’s Govt on degree of importance attached implementation [Page 18] military clauses treaty; and it was unanimous view that effective treaty enforcement was possible only if there was coordinated US and British action in all three countries and if US and British representatives could count on full backing their govts on major points such as those listed in paragraphs 3 and 4 above.

Sent Department 479; repeated Bucharest as 26; Budapest 17; London 47; Moscow 42.

  1. Telegram 250, July 9, to Sofia, not printed, repeated to Bucharest, Budapest, London, and Moscow, stated that the memorandum telegraphed to the War Department by General Robertson had been submitted by the War Department to the State–War–Navy Coordinating Committee with the recommendation that an ad hoc committee be appointed to consider the matter on a priority basis and to submit recommendations (740.00119 Control (Bulgaria)/6–2747). As submitted to the State–War–Navy Coordinating Committee, General Robertson’s memorandum and the covering memorandum from the War Department were designated SWNCC 244/6, July 7. By informal action on July 17, the State–War–Navy Coordinating Committee approved the recommendation contained in SWNCC 244/6.
  2. The comments of the Legation in Budapest are contained in telegram 1211, July 19, from Budapest, p. 19. Telegram 607, July 11, from Bucharest, not printed, reported that the mission in Rumania was unable to offer any commentary (740.0011 (Peace)/7–1147).
  3. Message R–700, July 9, from the United States Military Representation on the Allied Control Commission for Rumania to the War Department, not printed, commented upon General Robertson’s recommendations. There was complete agreement with numbered paragraph 2, but with regard to paragraph 3, the message read in part as follows:

    “Principles outlined in para three highly desirable but in our opinion impossible of accomplishment. We may even obtain agreement on points in question but satellite govt carrying out orders of their Soviet masters will never permit implementation.” (740.00119 Control (Hungary)/7–947)

  4. For documentation regarding the interest of the United States in the Greek frontier problem, see volume v .