840.811/8–1148: Telegram
The Secretary of State to the Embassy in Yugoslavia
480. Dudel 37. Following for urinfo are excerpts from Dept’s transcript of Secy’s press Conf Aug 11 relative Danube Conf.
“Question. Have you any comment re Danube Conf—any comments specifically as to whether it is worthwhile for Western powers in general and US in particular to continue meeting with Eastern powers?
Answer. Danube Conf now in progress is an excellent example of difficulties we encounter in all our negotiations regarding settlement of war abnormalities in Europe. We entered Conf because we feel we should be willing to discuss any of these questions and listen to arguments regarding these questions before an appropriate organization or tribunal. We feel we should not assume in advance that no agreement can be reached and that we should be careful to persist in the effort to settle these matters by negotiation and to reach agreements by process of negotiations. But it is perfectly clear we must not seek agreement merely for agreement’s sake. There are certain fundamentals to which we attach great importance that have to be considered by this Govt. That is notably the case in this Danubian situation. It seems clear to us that Soviet proposal is calculated to tie up commercial navigation in Danube in a method subject [Page 683] to control of Soviet Govt and its satellite states at expense of the general restoration of prosperity in Europe. Our purpose in going into the negotiation was a matter of principle and for purpose of seeing the river opened up to normal commerce on a pre-war basis for the restoration of economic prosperity in Europe. We cannot agree to enter a proposed system which can be utilized to obstruct in many ways free commerce on the Danube. We have a definite interest in protecting the riparian interest of Germany and Austria. Danube is truly a great international waterway. Navigation starts in Bavaria and touches Austria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Rumania, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, and Bessarabia of Soviet Union. If regulations governing traffic on that river and control of the commission that is set up is so arranged that all manner of checks and delays can be easily imposed, we do not have any true freedom of commerce.”
Secy answered subsequent question on whether we would revert to status quo and merely keep river bottled up above Linz if we do not obtain assurances river will be opened without discrimination by saying he was not going to comment on what we do next, and that Mr. Cannon can be depended upon to make that very plain.
To further question as to what was meant by his remark that “Agreement should not be reached for agreement’s sake” Secy said he was referring to general principle of just reaching an agreement regardless of what it does in way of violating fundamental principles. Asked whether that might be made to apply to current negotiations in Moscow, Secy replied that he had no comment to make.