Foreign Relations of the United States, 1948, Eastern Europe; The Soviet Union, Volume IV

840.811/8–1848: Telegram

The Ambassador in Yugoslavia (Cannon) to the Secretary of State

secret

Belgrade, August 18, 1948—9 p. m.

Deldu82. Danube Conference ended this afternoon following adoption convention by 7 votes to l.¹ USDel cast the negative vote. British and French remained in conference hall to the end but took no part in voting.

Vyshinski sprang surprise at start of session this morning announcing that while USSR had right to 2 votes in Danube Commission, it would take only 1. This would be vote of USSR including all Constituent Republics. Ukraine would not be represented. Move foreshadowed by naming of USSR, not Ukraine, as participant with Rumania in special administration for maritime Danube. This concession evoked no comment from conference.

As Vyshinski as chairman prepared to take vote on convention, Thierry led off day’s speeches with formal statement of French position. He declared France could not sign convention before conference, as it was not in conformity with CFM decisions and peace treaties, nor with text nor spirit of UN Charter. Convention, he said, was dictum [diktat] issued by one power and accepted by docile majority. He reserved all France rights under 1921 convention.

After Yugoslavian and Bulgarian Delegations had registered indignant protests against accusation of docility, Peake stated UK grounds for refusing to sign. These were roughly same as French, with greater emphasis on Soviet railroading tactics here, mention of Austrian issue, and reference to Soviet refusal to refer question of validity of 1921 convention to International course [Court].

Seeing that all delegations would have chance to speak, I maneuvered to have my declaration put off until as near the end as possible, Pauker, Clementis, and Molnar delivered brief but strongly worded statements defending their governments against charge of being docile and attacking past and present imperialist policies of western powers. Rosenberg stated AusDel had kept quiet during discussion of convention as it had no right to vote and that since Soviet draft accepted by majority from start, reasoned argument would be unavailing. He announced no convention not signed and ratified by Austria could be considered as in effect in Austria.

Near end of morning sitting I delivered statement cabled in Deldu 81 today. Vyshinski was only remaining speaker. He tried to show that SovDel had been willing to negotiate, citing three articles taken from US draft, acceptance of a French amendment with slight changes, and inclusion in Soviet draft of a number of articles taken from 1921 convention. He deplored decision of western powers not to sign, calling it violation of CFM decision of December 1946. He then talked at length on inequity of 1921 convention which violated sovereignty of Danube states, closing with general remarks on obsolete racial [social] forces and “acquired rights” attempting to hold back forward movement of new society led by USSR. Final remarks were buttressed by quotations from great Stalin and great Molotov.

This was probably Vyshinski’s most ineffective speech of the entire conference, as satellites could scarcely have failed to notice. During last three days and especially today he has looked harrassed and not happy about the way things were going. From tactics he has pursued at conference he must have known no other final result possible, yet his last minute attempts to make the performance appear less crude seem to show realization he may have overplayed Soviet hand.

At afternoon sitting Vyshinski as chairman put convention to vote article by article. Each of 56 separate votes resulted in 7 in favor, none against, with one abstention (US). British and French ignored voting. When convention as whole put to vote, USDel voted no.²

Convention being signed this evening. We are staying away from ceremony and from cocktail party being held immediately thereafter.³

Sent Department, Department pass Moscow, London, Paris, Sofia, Bucharest, Budapest, Praha, Vienna, Berlin, Geneva.

Cannon

1. The Convention regarding the Régime of Navigation on the Danube was signed at Belgrade on August 18, 1948, by the seven Danubian states which had participated in the conference. The Convention consisted of a preamble; 47 numbered articles; an Annex I on the entry of Austria into the Danubian Commission; an Annex II on navigation works in the Gabchikovo–Gönyü sector to ensure normal conditions on the river; and a Supplementary Protocol asserting that the provisions of the convention signed in Paris on July 23, 1921, were null and void, and that the functions of the former European and International Commissions of the Danube shall be cancelled. The first meeting of the new Danube Commission establishel by the Belgrade Convention opened at Galatz on November 11, 1949. For the text of the convention, see United Nations Treaty Series, vol. xxxiii, pp. 181–225.
2. The Department of State released to the press on August 18, a statement on the rejection of the Soviet draft convention, and on the position taken by the United States government; for text, see Department of State Bulletin, September 12, 1948, p. 333.

3. The convention was signed at a special evening session at 7 p. m., by delegates of the seven Danubian countries who had approved it at the conference. The United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Austria did not attend the ceremony.

   Ambassador Cannon reported in telegram 1120 from Belgrade on August 19, 4 p. m., that the newspaper Borba described the party given for the delegates of the seven Danubian countries as a “gala reception”, although in the telegram it was characterized as being the same “tepid hospitality” that had marked the relations between the conference and the Yugoslav government and the Communist Party of Yugoslavia throughout its course. (840.811/8–1948)