871.00/12–847: Telegram
The Ambassador in the United Kingdom (Douglas) to the Acting Secretary of State
6374. Embassy has received following communication from Foreign Office relative proposed note to Rumanian Government on Human [Page 513] Rights clause of Peace Treaty (Embtel 6236, November 28, and Deptel 4992, November 261).
“As we have already told you in person, implications of possible action in Rumania on subject of Human Eights clause of Peace Treaty have been subject of careful consideration here; and I am sorry that our reply to your letter to Watson of 28 November has been so long delayed.2
“We have no comment to offer upon the draft note to Rumanian Government which you were so good as to communicate to us; but I have been asked to let you know that result of our deliberation has been a decision against instructing our Minister to make a protest at present time. Main factors which have led to this decision are that King Michael has not yet returned to Rumania and that it may be wiser to avoid raising any controversial issue in Rumania so long as Council of Foreign Ministers is in session. We entirely agree that there exists state of affairs in Rumania in breach of Rumania’s Treaty obligations, and our decision to hold our hand is therefore based on tactical considerations rather than on considerations of principle.
“We observe that your proposed communication to Rumanian Government calls upon that Government to take certain remedial measures. On this particular point, we ourselves, had we considered that the time was ripe for a protest, would have been inclined merely to draw attention of Rumanian Government to existence of a state of affairs in breach of treaty and to avoid any specific request for action. It seems to us that a request for action would go some way towards precipitating a “dispute” in the sense of Article 38 of treaty, and that such a request might therefore set in train the machinery for settlement of a dispute under Articles 37 and 38. We have already discussed with you on various occasions disadvantages of applying this machinery for first time to an “ideological” issue; and you will be aware that, in the note we have recently communicated to Bulgarian Government on the breach of Article 2 of the Bulgarian Treaty (a copy of which is enclosed3), we have confined ourselves to recording our view that a situation exists in Bulgaria which is in conflict with treaty obligations of Bulgarian Government.”
Foregoing has been brought to attention of SecDel,4 which has no comments to make at this time.
Sent Department 6374; repeated Bucharest 50.
- Telegram 4992, November 26, to London, not printed, transmitted the text of the proposed note to the Rumanian Government regarding the denial of fundamental freedoms in Rumania. The note is discussed in telegram 711, November 26, to Bucharest (repeated to London), ante. Telegram 6236, November 28, from London, not printed, stated that the British position on the matter would have to be decided upon by Foreign Secretary Bevin (871.00/11–2647, 11–2847).↩
- The letter under reference, not transmitted to the Department, presumably conveyed the text of the proposed American note to the Rumanian Government.↩
- The British note under reference here was not transmitted with the source text.↩
- The reference here is to the United States Delegation to the Fifth Session of the Council of Foreign Ministers in London, November 25–December 15.↩