840.811/8–148: Telegram
The Ambassador in Yugoslavia (Cannon) to the Secretary of State
Deldu 23. French statement reserving rights under convention of 1921 and Austrian request for voting rights were two main topics discussed by Danube Conference at second meeting yesterday.
Somewhat recovered from their agitated state of previous evening described in Deldu 17, July 31, French delegate1 made no threat to walk out of conference but nevertheless firmly asserted France had certain acquired rights under 1921 convention which could not be abrogated without consent of all parties thereto. Peake made similar statement on behalf of UK.
By making these declarations so early in proceedings French and British played into hand of Soviet bloc spokesmen who seized opportunity to charge attempt to limit freedom of conference to conclude new convention.
Five satellite delegates spoke in opposition, arguing that 1921 convention was product of period when Danubian states not fully sovereign and dominated by great powers, whereas now under new conditions those nations, strong and free, not willing accept subordinate status. Pauker and others poured scorn on France’s “acquired rights” as right of exploitation which new democracies would never recognize. They held 1921 convention not in force and that this conference could not in any way be limited by it.
Vyshinsky delivered long and vitriolic speech denouncing French and British statements as examples of “methods of dictators” and as ultimatums issued to conference. He accused France and UK of trying to put pressure on conference, setting conditions sine qua non for adherence to new convention even before proposals for such convention submitted for discussion. He included US in his denunciation although I had not spoken on subject.
Vyshinsky argued that 1921 convention is no longer in force since replaced by Danube articles and [in] peace treaties and in fact already destroyed by UK and France in concluding Sinaia agreements with Rumania in 1938 without consent by all signatories. Western powers, he said, now had choice of accepting new convention which majority would work out here or losing its benefits. Door was open for them to come in or go out.2 Conference, said Vyshinsky, would not [Page 641] impose anything on a minority, but would accept no ultimatums.
I replied only briefly to Vyshinsky, protesting unwarranted charge of issuing ultimatums, but put off further statement on substance.
Austrian delegation made its plea for full participation in conference, which we and British supported (see Deldu 21, August 1). Soviet bloc was solid in opposition, Vyshinsky holding out our sponsorship of Austrian request was departure from Four-Power decision that Austria should attend only in consultative capacity. Conference voted seven to two against US motion to accept Austria as full voting member. French abstained stating that rules of procedure not yet adopted after stating preference for Soviet counter-proposal to endorse consultative status and asking us to withdraw our motion in interests of unanimity.
We here think it was useful to put our support of Austria on record even though defeat of proposal was certain. Summary rejection of Austrian request indicates Soviets see no reason to pay heed to views and interests of Austria.
Sent Department; Department pass Moscow, Bucharest, Sofia, Budapest, Prague, Vienna, Paris, London, Geneva, Berlin.
- Adrien Thierry, president of the Central Rhine Commission.↩
- According to the United States verbatim report of the translation, Vyshinsky asserted: “This is the language of, I would say, bosses; this is not the language of collaborators; it is the language of dictators. The Soviet delegation must firmly reject such language and we must tell you gentlemen we will not accept ultimatums—we will completely disregard them. We must say in this connection, and it must be said openly, that the door was open for you to come in; the same door is open for you to go out, if this is what you wish. This is putting the question clearly politically. No one forced you to come to participate in this conference.”↩