501.BC Greece/2–1547: Telegram

The Secretary of State to Mr. Mark F. Ethridge, at Athens

secret
us urgent

200. For Ethridge. Following are preliminary views in partial response to urtels 145 and 223, Feb 3 and 15.1

1.
Re your views on desirability establishing continuing commission of surveillance along Northern Greek frontier Dept in general agreement and believes that Investigating Commission and SC could appropriately make recommendations along following lines:
(a)
Frontier Regulations, Patrols and Neutral Observers.
Recommendation might be (1) that countries involved adopt agreed regulations governing frontier with such provisions designed to prevent continuance of past conflicts as Commission, on basis of its findings, might suggest. (2) That border patrols maintained by each State be given task of enforcing such frontier regulations. (3) That group of neutral observers analogous to Swedish officers on Greco-Bulgarian border commission of 1925 be assigned observe frontier conditions and adherence to regulations; their presence would promote a calmer atmosphere; they would be responsible to and under direction of proposed continuing commission if established; otherwise to SC; they would have authority to move freely on both sides frontier to investigate incidents and report thereon; and would act as point of contact between patrols.
(b)
Establishment of Continuing Commission.
Investigating commission could recommend a continuing commission to be established by and responsible to SC. Its principal purpose would be to facilitate prompt settlement frontier differences between the four states so that solution would first be sought by the parties in [Page 822] accordance with Article 33 of Charter and only referred to SC as final resort. Its terms of reference in our view should be limited to problems directly connected with border violations and threatening frontier situations and it might be given following powers and responsibilities in relation thereto:
(1)
To investigate matters coming within its terms of reference, to make recommendations concerning procedures for settling disputes to Govts concerned, and where necessary to make recommendations to SC concerning either merits of a case or procedures for settling it, but at all times keeping SC informed.
(2)
To assist and encourage disputant states in settlement differences in accordance with Article 33.
(3)
To act as mediation or conciliation commission.
(4)
To direct activities neutral observers.
(5)
To study and recommend methods by which four Govts could better handle matters arising in future within commission’s terms of reference which might lead to friction between states.
(6)
To perform other functions as SC may later assign.
Commission should be able to deal directly with four Govts in performance its functions. Finally, although we don’t wish to establish too firm a position on composition commission at this time, we believe US should be member. If so it would undoubtedly have to consist of representatives of major powers and, therefore, in all probability of all members SC. We would prefer a smaller commission. Whether such composition would be feasible can be best determined on basis experience your commission.
2.
With respect to possible recommendation by SC Commission that regional arrangement such as Balkan Entente of 1935 be concluded by Greece, Albania, Bulgaria and Yugoslavia, Dept feels that although probably constitutional under Charter present situation militates against it. There is no apparent indication on part states concerned that they desire establish such arrangement. Community of interest among states is lacking and Greece would at best be minority member; hence subjected to unified pressure other three. In any event we do not believe concept embodied in Balkan Entente of 1935 creating mutual defense machinery and renouncing aggression would aid materially in ameliorating present situation. Yugoslavia, and Greece as signatories UN Charter have already agreed to ref rain from aggression under Article 2(4). In addition relations of four States with other Southern European nations must be taken into account.
3.
Another proposal which merits consideration and which you may wish explore with your colleagues is bilateral agreements between Greece and each her northern neighbors providing machinery for pacific settlement disputes not capable settlement by normal diplomatic means. These could be supplementary to proposed commission. This idea may be premature. A willingness on part parties to make such arrangements work would be prerequisite for success. Unless it did [Page 823] exist this plan might be extremely dangerous as it would appear plausible solution and in effect be no solution at all. Even so, it has merit as part long-range solution and could be included in recommendations your commission as a specific formula to be studied by continuing commission.
4.
With regard to tendentious mis-statements of fact in press and radio, difficulties of reaching agreement on suitable recommendations are apparent. Dept therefore believes this subject may best be covered by full disclosure to world of facts uncovered by Commission or in future by confirming commission.
5.
Dept doubts wisdom attempting deal with foreign military missions through suggested continuing commission. Although we still doubt desirability of going into this question, if your commission decides investigate such missions, we would wish reserve our position re possible recommendations pending full report facts. Present feeling here is that action should be limited to public disclosure those facts.
6.
In general, Dept wishes to emphasize importance commission’s report and benefits to be derived from full disclosure facts ascertained by Commission. On matters on which it will be impossible for Commission to reach agreement on recommendations, objective factual data contained in report will go far towards achievement desired aim.
7.
We are making study Salonika problem and will despatch it to you as soon as completed. In general, however, Dept sees no objection to reviving free zone in Salonika and believes if warranted by facts brought out by investigation that Commission could recommend that states commence negotiations looking towards such arrangement.

Conclusion: Foregoing represents Dept’s views at this juncture. It is, of course, subject to revision in light findings your commission and changes which may subsequently appear desirable. We would appreciate your views and suggestions concerning above.2

Marshall
  1. No. 223 not printed.
  2. This telegram was repeated for Ambassador Austin as No. 52.