Office of the Historian

761.93/2–2847: Telegram

The Ambassador in the Soviet Union (Smith) to the Secretary of State

Moscow, February 28, 1947—7 p.m.
[Received 8:20 p.m.]

586. Following is body of note from Foreign Office dated February 27 received in reply to Embassy’s note of January 3 regarding Dairen:

“As is well known, status of Dairen and Chinese Changchun railway is defined by Soviet-Chinese agreements of August 14, 1945 regarding port of Dairen and Chinese Changchun railway, and accordingly questions arising in connection with these agreements come within competence of Governments of USSR and China. Soviet Government for its part has always expressed its readiness for appropriate steps and has done everything possible for exact execution of these agreements.

[Page 496]

“Mention in Embassy’s note of abnormal situation in Far East, which evidently envisages situation in China, cannot be regarded as reason for laying any responsibility for situation on USSR.

“As regards district of Port Arthur naval base provided for in Soviet-Chinese agreement,32 as well as Dairen, Soviet Government has applied and is applying all possible measures, so far as depends upon it, for establishment of normal situation in this district and in city of Dairen.

“It is not necessary to speak here in detail of agreement which has [been] concluded at Moscow conference of three Ministers in December 194533 on question of withdrawal both of Soviet and American troops from China. Soviet Government considers that exact execution both by Soviet Union and United States of America of this agreement and of other conditions provided for by Moscow agreement has highly important significance for establishment of normal situation in China. For its part Soviet Government has done everything which agreement demanded of it, having already concluded withdrawal of Soviet troops from Manchuria in spring of last year.”

Smith
  1. Signed at Moscow, August 14, 1945: United Nations Treaty Series, vol. 10, p. 358.↩
  2. Department of State Bulletin, December 30, 1945, pp. 1027, 1030, or Foreign Relations, 1945, vol. ii, pp. 815, 821.↩