740.0011 EW (Peace)/5–948: Telegram
The Minister in Bulgaria (Heath) to the Secretary of State
574. At close my talk with Kolarov (see preceding telegram)1 I remarked that I would appreciate clarification of statement in his speech of May 7 (Legtel 571, May 82) that request of two “big powers” to inspect Bulgaria’s southern border region was “an openly unlawful act”.
At first arguing that “unlawfulness” was explained in subsequent portion of speech Kolarov finally stated that “illegality” of request lay in fact that it was not made in concert (Article 36 of peace treaty) by all three powers. He went on to argue that request was improper because the inspection of border would violate Bulgarian sovereignty. I replied that practically any treaty concluded by Bulgaria and US limited their sovereignty in some point or degree principally Article 12 proposing inspection Bulgaria had accepted limitation on her “sovereignty” in agreeing not construct fortifications where weapons capable of firing into Greek territory could be emplaced. Kolarov admitted this but went on to say that when treaty was negotiated it was recognized that there were no fortifications of this character and that unless we had “suspicion” that such fortifications had been constructed in some particular place then we had no right propose an inspection. (This was argument used by Soviet Chargé Legtel 207, February 16.)2 We obviously did not believe there were any such fortifications since border had been inspected a year ago and none were found or could have been built since that time.
I observed that in this modern age fortifications could be quite speedily constructed but question of whether or not they had in fact been built was hardly in point. Article 12 forbade their construction and obviously obligated powers entrusted with responsibilities for implementation of treaty to inspect and report as to their existence or non-existence. It was not question of doubting Bulgarian assurances but Bulgarian Government was an interested party and could not act as sole judge of implementation of multilateral peace treaty.
Kolarov did not dispute this statement but went on to say that if Bulgaria admitted right to make inspection then we could claim right inspect “every day”. Furthermore, we had not asked to inspect on point or points but had asked to roam entire border at will which [Page 335] would be an inadmissible violation of Bulgaria’s sovereignty. With “Greek forces firing on Bulgarian territory, killing and abducting frontier guards” Bulgaria obviously could not permit such investigation of its defense regions. Greeks had fortifications right on Bulgarian border in Struma Valley but across border Bulgaria had none.
I remarked that I did not wish discuss border question at this time but that he must admit that it was at least a controversial one in which severe complaints had been made against Bulgaria. Obviously, we had neither time nor desire make daily inspections and the practical question of how many inspections should be made had as far as I knew not been studied. However, if I might be so bold as to make a personal suggestion on Bulgarian policy, I thought it would be advantageous to its reputation not to await request for these border inspections which were required by treaty but itself take initiative in asking powers responsible for treaty implementation to make complete inspection. If such inspections showed absence of such fortifications as he assured me it would report to that effect would in every way redound to Bulgaria’s advantage.
Kolarov smiled in rather troubled way and changed subject by inquiring about my recent trip Istanbul. He assumed it was “political trip”. I replied that I had a very pleasant time in Istanbul.
Prior to seeing Kolarov I spoke with his special assistant George Andreichin who had asked me to come earlier to talk with him. I remarked to Andreichin that Foreign Minister’s speech had been “strong” and I had not understood his statement that proposed border inspection was “unlawful”.
Andreichin said we must understand that it had been his duty to bring to Kolarov’s attention statements recently made by Law in debate in Parliament to effect that Greek-Bulgarian border should be sealed by international troops and if inspection for fortifications were denied by Bulgarian Government then an aerial photographic survey should be made of Bulgarian borders. This taken together with a statement made by someone in US Congress that three or four American divisions should be sent to guard border and only present lack of troops prevented this from being done naturally alarmed Foreign Minister. Andreichin then changed the subject.
I gained distinct impression from talking with Kolarov that he was perfectly aware of our right make such inspections and intended if request was pressed to avoid direct refusal by seeking after delays to limit trip to some specified border point—say the Struma Valley which he had mentioned.
Andreichin’s remark above-quoted is another indication that there is real apprehension lest international guards be assigned seal Greek-Bulgarian [Page 336] border. In this connection, it will be recalled that Kolarov stated to Bulgarian journalists (Legtel 372, March 21)3 that Bulgaria did not want American troops on frontier. One is tempted to think that if Bulgarian Government (i.e. Soviets) does not wish international guards posted in Greece that it must be right thing to do.
Department’s instructions or comment on my statement to Kolarov’s would be appreciated.
Sent Department 574; repeated Athens 41, Athens pass BalCom, London, 62, Belgrade 46.