Office of the Historian

501.AA/3–2348: Telegram

The Chargé in the United Kingdom (Gallman) to the Secretary of State

secret
London, March 23, 1948—7 p. m.

1194. Foreign Office informs Embassy that instructions have been sent to British delegation New York and repeated to British Embassy Washington in reply to urgent telegram of March 22 from British delegation concerning revised proposal to bring up Italy’s application for UN membership only without linking it with Transjordan application. Foreign Office believes that there are several objections to raising Italian case only among them the following:

(1)
Technically there is no basis for considering Italian application without simultaneous consideration of Transjordan application. It would give Russia opportunity to insist that case of satellites be considered simultaneously.
(2)
Soviets have never objected to admission of Italy and if we refuse to consider satellite applications it would afford Soviets opportunity to make counter-propaganda. Results might easily be opposite of those desired by US.
(3)
Such obvious tactics with eye on Italian elections might even lessen good done by tri-partite action on Trieste which so far is judged by Foreign Office to have had excellent results.
(4)
Blatant use of UN for propaganda purposes is something for which we criticize Soviets and where gain to US so uncertain it would be pity to resort to Soviet type of maneuver, thereby giving them basis for arguing that we, too, use UN for propaganda purposes.

Mason indicated he hoped US would either abandon its intention entirely to bring up Italian case only, or at least to await developments for fortnight which would give time for further evaluation of possible results and action before Italian elections.

Opinion in Foreign Office indicated by both Mason and Crosthwaite is hardening into belief that raising question of Italian application would at best have negligible election propaganda value and might in fact have opposite effect and even impair good done by action on Trieste.1

Gallman
  1. For documentation regarding the Trieste question, see vol. iii, pp. 549 ff.↩