840.811/8–1248: Telegram
The Ambassador in Yugoslavia (Cannon) to the Secretary of State
Deldu56. Voting on Article 1 Danube Convention at yesterday’s session of general committee resulted in rejection of US amendment by seven to three vote and adoption of Soviet article by seven to one with two absentions. Disagreeable situation arose when Thierry, in explaining French negative vote, unwisely challenged Soviet position on basis records CFM New York meeting 1946, and was accused by Vyshinski of refusing to accept agreed decisions and covering up refusal by distorting facts. Thierry asked for floor to reply but was refused by chairman, Bebler, who then put his ruling to vote of committee and was upheld. French deeply resented this action and absented themselves from a large part of the remainder of the session.
British introduced their amendment to Article 2 proposing all three mouths,1 lateral canals and tributaries (as defined in 1921 convention) be part of international Danube. Bebler, Klementis and Vyshinski stated the case for rejecting amendment. Bebler concentrated on question of tributaries, arguing that Yugoslavia not bound by defunct 1921 convention or by international law (citing Oppenheim2 [Page 687] and Hackworth3) to recognize international character of Drava or Yugoslav sector of Tisza. Vyshinski explained Sulina only navigable channel and no reason to include other mouths. He backed up Bebler’s argument on tributaries, holding that history, economics, international law, and the principle of sovereignty all pointed to exclusion of tributaries from river covered by convention. All three Soviet bloc spokesmen stressed wording of Paris Conference recommendation and CFM decision, namely, Danube and not Danube river system. Original US–UK proposal at Paris referred to river system, but this was withdrawn in favor of French compromise mentioning only Danube river. Soviet had strong argument on this point which British did not attempt to combat.
In course of discussion USDel again reserved rights under 1921 convention, stating decisions of 1946 and participation in present conference entirely without prejudice to these rights. In presenting briefly US views, I stated our belief that convention should cover river system including all the Danube mouths and lateral canals. I also endorsed British amendment with respect to tributaries but said we had open mind on which tributaries and how much of them should be included, our main concern being that exclusion of certain tributaries might be obstacle to maximum river traffic. UK amendment to Article 2 received two votes in favor, seven against. French ignored voting, not even going on record as abstaining. Seven votes then registered for Soviet Article 2. US voted against. British and French ignored voting.
No discussing on Article 3, on which no amendments offered. Vote was seven in favor, none against, two abstentions (US and UK). French ignored voting.
Sent Department. Department pass Moscow, London, Paris, Prague, Vienna, Berlin, Budapest, Sofia, Bucharest, Geneva.
- The three mouths, or channels, of the Danube river entering the Black Sea through the delta are, from the north, the Kilia (Chilia), the Sulina, and the St. George.↩
- L. Oppenheim, author of International Law, a Treatise, 2d edition, 2 volumes, New York: Longmans, Green, 1912.↩
- Green H. Hackworth, a former Legal Adviser of the Department of State, who prepared the Digest of International Law, 8 volumes, Washington: Government Printing Office, 1940–1944.↩