Foreign Relations of the United States, 1947, The Near East and Africa, Volume V

501.BC Greece/3–947: Telegram

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

secret
us urgent

Washington , March 14, 1947—8 p. m.

19. For Ethridge.

1. Progress you are making in spite of many difficulties is gratifying to Dept. We have noted with concern activities of Secretariat and bias of Ryan press reports (re Ethridge No. 20¹).

We hope action taken by Commission will end these problems. However, Dept. would be willing to take matter up with Lie if you think it necessary.

2. We observe that you believe Commission may commence preparing report by April 10. Since preparation may require some days Dept. is glad to learn that it will be drafted in Geneva. This will enable Commission to remain relatively close to area before departure for New York. In addition we strongly favor having Commission leave eleven-man team in area while report is being drafted and subsequently while SC is considering report. This seems desirable in order that (a) Commission and Council may have latest information available and (b) there be a UN group in area pending final council action.

3. British Embassy here has informed Dept that FonOff favors submission of preliminary report by your Commission to SC with recommendation that SC establish a semi-permanent Commission to remain in Greece while final report is being drafted and subsequently during SC consideration of it. We think it would be difficult to obtain SC agreement to such a semi-permanent Commission at this juncture. We therefore believe that procedure suggested in foregoing paragraph is preferable.

4. Re idea of non-aggression pact with inclusion of 1933 definition of aggression. We do not believe that conclusion of such a pact would serve useful purpose or be an important contribution to stabilizing conditions in Balkans. A non-aggression pact between Greece and Yugoslavia, for example, would simply constitute a re-affirmation of obligations already assumed by them under Charter. In addition, we do not see wisdom of attempting to define aggression. At San Francisco² USDel opposed attempts at definition on ground that any definition would not be all inclusive under modern conditions and that SC should be left free to determine in each instance whether aggression had in fact occurred.

5. We still favor establishment of border patrols, regulations and assignment of neutral observers (re Deptel 200³). We understand from your telegram that majority of your colleagues are in agreement re creation of continuing Commission under SC. That US favors latter is now public knowledge here.

6. We would be interested in your reaction and reactions of your colleagues to possibility suggested in Deptel 200 that bilateral agreements be concluded between Greece and each of her northern neighbors establishing machinery for the peaceful settlement of disputes. We are inclined to believe that such a recommendation would not only be in harmony with Article 33 of Charter but might in fact contribute to future solution of differences and problems arising between several states.⁴

[Here follow three additional paragraphs of comment.]

Sent to Salonika, repeated to Athens, London, Belgrade, Sofia and Moscow for the Secretary.

Acheson

1. Identified also as No. 12 from Salonika, not printed.
2. During the United Nations Conference on International Organization in 1945.
3. Dated February 20, p. 821.
4. Mr. Ethridge replied in telegram 28 (No. 18 from Salonika), March 18, noon. He noted especially, in commenting on paragraphs numbered 2 and 3 “that procedure of having Commission itself establish team to remain in Salonika pending SC action on Commission report without reference to SC is desirable. However, if objection is raised in Commission on grounds that it would be ultra vires without further authority from SC for Commission to continue itself in existence after submission of its report to SC I feel that I would have to give way. Accordingly at this time I propose to take line that a team should remain in Salonika until Commission has transmitted its report to SC.” (501.BC Greece/3–1847)