711.67/9–948
Memorandum of Conversation, by the Secretary of State
| Participants: | The Secretary |
| Feridun Cemal Erkin, Turkish Ambassador | |
| J. C. Satterthwaite, Director, NEA |
On his first call on official business Ambassador Erkin referred to the repeated queries which he has received subsequent to his return to Ankara from Rome last February whether it was true that Turkey intended to change its policy, forsaking its close ties with Great Britain and the United States and signing a pact of friendship with the Soviet Union. He added that he had assured those asking this question that it was completely untrue. Turkey’s foreign policy, he said, is firmly based on friendship, cooperation and solidarity with the United States.
Mr. Erkin said that in his view the reason for these reports was the following: After the former Soviet Ambassador to Turkey had been absent from Ankara for some eighteen months the Soviet Government suddenly requested the agrément for the present Ambassador, Mr. Lavrischev. He (Erkin) returned to Ankara from Rome (where he was Ambassador) at about that time and both the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister requested his opinion as to the meaning of this appointment. They wondered if it might mean a renewal of the pressure which the Soviet Government had exerted on Turkey two years previously. Mr. Erkin told them that he did not think so. Turkey had given a resounding no to such pressure then and was prepared to do so again. Such a rebuff would therefore mean a loss of prestige for the Soviet Government. He thought it more likely that the Soviet Union wanted to soften the Turkish Government and to propose a pact of friendship. Actually Ambassador Lavrischev has not as yet made such a proposal. He has, however, made soundings which made it probable that he would have done so had the response been favorable. In the meantime the Soviet propaganda line has been aimed principally at the political and economic difficulties being encountered by the Turkish Government.
With reference to the political difficulties Mr. Erkin went on to refer to the great desire of his government, as expressed by his predecessor, to adhere to the western union or some other regional arrangement within the framework of the Vandenberg resolution. He himself had raised this question with Mr. Lovett and had been told that the present time was not opportune. Turkey was, however, very anxious indeed to effect such an arrangement. He would, therefore, wait until the State Department approached him or until it seemed to him that the time [Page 149] was propitious for such an arrangement. He mentioned as a possible alternative regional arrangement one including Turkey and Greece having the support of Great Britain and the United States.
The Ambassador then went on to make what he said was a personal suggestion that, pending the association of Turkey with a suitable regional security system it might be advantageous if the United States Government were to declare its interest in Turkey in terms somewhat bolder than those used in the Greek-Turkish Aid Bill.
The Ambassador then went on to say that in connection with the Soviet propaganda line attacking certain economic weaknesses in Turkey, he found it necessary to raise again the urgent matter of the sale of Turkish tobacco to the American and British Zones of Germany. I said that I was familiar with this problem. I assured the Ambassador that the Department supported the Turkish position and that we were doing everything we could to work out an arrangement satisfactory to Turkey. He could be sure that whatever claims the Soviet propaganda might make regarding economic imperialism on the part of the United States that was not the real reason for the difficulty over the sale of Turkish tobacco in one of its well established markets.
Remarking that he had but recently arrived here and had not, therefore, had time to familiarize himself with the manner in which Congress operates, I explained to him the procedure under which expenditures are authorized by Congress after hearings held before the Foreign Relations and Foreign Affairs Committees, but that the money itself then has to be justified before the Appropriations Committees and that the amount recommended in legislation already approved is not always made available. I pointed out that in almost every aspect of our foreign policy we had to depend on the appropriation of large sums of money by Congress. ECA and the War Department, who had the principal responsibility for the purchase of tobacco in Germany, desired to make the right decision. It was, however, essential for them to get along with the members of the Appropriations Committees if they were to obtain the wherewithal with which to maintain their departments and carry out the responsibilities with which they were charged.
I also mentioned the fact that the implementation of Soviet foreign policy, being based on a gangster system, costs very little. The United States on the other hand is charged with enormous responsibilities and with the absolute necessity of making huge expenditures in areas like Japan where no one else is willing to foot the bill. I mentioned our commitments in the Far East for the reason that it is impossible for us to cut down on our expenditures there and this means that it is natural for Congress to endeavor to make reductions in expenditures for Europe.
[Page 150]Inasmuch as the Department is already doing everything that it can to effect a speedy arrangement of the tobacco problem, it was agreed upon the Ambassador’s departure that we would facilitate interviews for him with Mr. Hoffman of ECA and Assistant [Under] Secretary Draper of the Army Department.