840.811/8–1048: Telegram
The Ambassador in Yugoslavia (Cannon) to the Secretary of State
Deldu48. From Dustmann for Michael McDermott and Dunning. Statement Cannon support US amendment preamble draft convention regime navigation Danube given before General Committee August 10:
[Page 676]Mr. Chairman, in submitting American proposal amendments preamble, we decided adopt greater part Soviet text, although were several passages we would have expressed differently. Therefore, we could endorse French proposal just defeated by usual vote. American amendment is relatively simple one. There is amendment third paragraph which would then read: “USSR, UK and Northern Ireland, US, France, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Rumania, Ukrainian SSR and Yugoslavia;
Whereas CFM have on 12th December 1946 decided call conference to work out new convention regarding regime navigation Danube, to be composed representative states referred to above; and
Desirous providing free navigation Danube accordance interests all nations and with due regard sovereign rights Danube states and in order strengthen economic and cultural relations Danube states between themselves and other nations, and recognizing conditions of economic well-being and peaceful relations among nations should be promoted on Danube accordance Charter of the UN.1
Have resolved conclude convention regarding regime navigation Danube and for that purpose have appointed undersigned plentipotentiaries who, after presentation full powers, found in good and due form, have agreed following.”
Purpose change is that paragraph give explicit recognition principle that problems Danube intimately connected with broader world problems. Danube area will be more prosperous and secure if there is full recognition economic ties between Danubian and other nations, both to East and West. Peoples along great waterways well aware that fact. We are convinced that to single out interests riparian states as sole concern convention and separate them from interests other nations fundamental mistake. Would be harmful long run both riparian states and nonriparian nations. First change suggested American amendment is recognition developments along river are concern to non-riparian states. As mentioned my earlier statements, US feels that a number nonriparian states for variety reasons have clear interests conditions along Danube and maintenance freedom navigation. We also think recognition this interest by convention direct benefit to welfare peoples whole Danube area and would not interfere with or weaken sovereignty Danube states.
[Page 677]Within this region are hundreds of idle ships today. We should like see active trade, that could be moving today, resumed soon possible, and it is purpose this convention aid bringing condition about. We know railway systems suffered greatly during war, that roadbeds in bad condition. Hard find maintenance materials keep them going. Great distress many parts Europe, even this region, and here is great inland waterway not contributing its part.
A statement few minutes ago made by Rumanian delegate, that Rumanian ships are “up the river”. Don’t know what “up the river” may mean. If it means ships are in that part Danube under US control, wish to state here and now that there are no Rumanian ships that part of river under American control. Rumanian Government put in claim 18 ships. 18 ships released in area of Danube over which Americans have control, now none left there. If it is question of ships “up the river” they must be some other zone where Americans have no control, where far as Danube is concerned US has little contact or say.
Second paragraph [part] American amendment must be clear to all. US has made known here that US supports effective relationship between new Danube convention and UN. Problems that will concern new commission will be of importance all Europe and world. If it to be intent of new commission to recognize broader implications of problem, some recognition of UN role appears essential. We all know UN itself is conscious of problems this area and would like to contribute in solution these problems. This was shown by request of Secretary General that UN be allowed to send observer to conference. No amount misinterpretation can cloud basic fact that peoples and nations this area have nothing lose, much gain, by recognition principles Charter of UN and by working agreement between nations this area, commission to be established, and UN. This clause in preamble asserts general recognition on part of signatories that principle of UN Charter is applicable on Danube. None of us would deny that. All of us, on many occasions, have subscribed those principles as basic to conduct of peaceful relations between our respective nations.
End Cannon statement.
Text third paragraph Soviet draft preamble without our amendments follows:
“Desirous of providing free navigation on Danube in accordance with interests sovereign rights of Danube states and in order strengthen economic cultural relations of Danube states between themselves and other nations.”
Advise if these statements arriving too late for proper release to press. Otherwise will assume arriving O.K.
Suggest you point out to press that above statement is first of several statements by US on amendments and that these will be our summations [Page 678] of basic substantive differences between our and Soviet conception of Danube convention. Others will follow soonest. [Dustmann.]
- The
proposed United States amendments to the third paragraph of the
preamble of the Soviet draft convention are here shown by the words
inserted in italics, and one word of the
Soviet draft which would be eliminated has been lined out:
“Desirous of providing for free navigation on the Danube in accordance with the interests and of all nations and with due regard for the sovereign rights of the Danube States and in order to strengthen economic and cultural relations of the Danube States between themselves and with other nations, and recognizing that conditions of economic well-being and peaceful relations among nations should be promoted on the Danube in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations”
↩