Foreign Relations of the United States, 1949, Eastern Europe; The Soviet Union, Volume V

Under Secretary’s Meetings, Lot 53 D 250

[Extracts]

Draft Paper Prepared in the Department of State¹

confidential

[Washington,] December 9, 1949.

The Soviet “Peace” Offensive

the problem

To determine the nature and objectives of current Soviet “peace” propaganda and to identify techniques and themes utilized in this offensive; specifically to guide US overseas information media and educational exchange in handling news relating to the Soviet “peace” offensive and in developing propaganda lines designed to minimize the impact and counter the purposes of this Soviet campaign.

discussion

I. Background

A. General

The current Soviet peace offensive was launched in May, 1948 when the Soviet Foreign Office deliberately misconstrued a sentence in an aide-mémoire of US Ambassador Smith, interpreting it as an overture for bilateral negotiations on terms suitable to the USSR.² When the maneuver was exposed, the USSR sought to persuade world public opinion that the US had slammed the door on “peace.” In the same month, Stalin answered an open letter by Mr. Henry Wallace, ignoring seven of the fifteen suggestions offered by Wallace as a basis for US-USSR cooperation and accepting only such proposals as were consonant with those previously advanced by the USSR.³ Both these developments were utilized to emphasize before world opinion that the USSR wanted peace, whereas the US did not.

These beginnings were expanded into a full-fledged campaign involving periodic “peace” statements by prominent Soviet officials, numerous national and international congresses convened “in defense of peace,” observance of “International Day for the struggle for Peace” saturation of the complex Soviet propaganda machine with the “peace” theme and exploitation both of front organizations and UN agencies as propaganda sounding boards for “peace.” The most recent “peace proposal” made in the UN General Assembly by Foreign Minister Vishinsky condemned the United States for preparing a new war of aggression, called for the prohibition of atomic weapons and urged the five Great Powers to conclude among themselves a pact for the strengthening of peace.⁴

Indicative of the hopes which the USSR attaches to the “peace movement” is the consideration which the recent Cominform meeting in Hungary gave the “peace offensive.”⁵ A resolution passed at that time declares that the “Partisans of Peace” movement should be broadened further to include all social groups, particularly the “widest layers of the working class.” This suggests that Moscow considers the “peace offensive” as potentially the most effective means of rallying non-communist foreign support and of influencing the political line of labor organizations.

Since the White House announcement concerning an atomic explosion in the USSR,⁶ the Soviet propaganda apparatus has increasingly exploited the putative possession by the USSR of the atomic “secret” to step up its agitation aimed at undermining US influence both in Western Europe and the Middle and Far East: While maintaining the current line on Soviet utilization of atomic energy for peaceful purposes, Soviet propaganda is capitalizing on the psychological opportunities presented by the White House announcement; emphasizing the alleged change in US strategy from dependence on the atom bomb to the urgent need for large ground forces—to be supplied by Western Europe—in order to strengthen the suspicion that the USSR has developed considerable atomic warfare potential.

B. Peace Congresses

One of the favorite chosen instruments of the larger and more important “peace offensive” has been the “peace congress.” The first of these congresses, convened August, 1948 in Wroclaw, Poland, and called the “World Congress of Intellectuals for Peace” adopted a manifesto urging the intellectuals of all countries “to hold national intellectual congresses for peace; to establish everywhere national committees for peace; and to strengthen the international relations of cultural workers of all countries in the interests of peace.” Before the Wroclaw Congress adjourned, it also established a Permanent Liaison Committee of Intellectuals for World Peace, with an interlocking directorate and with permanent headquarters in Paris. This Committee was charged with the responsibility of planning and preparing the way for both international and national congresses.

Since Wroclaw, numerous congresses or conferences, both international and national have been convened with the ostensible aim of uniting all people who are for peace and opposed to war. The most prominent of these are as follows:—

International “Peace” meetings.

US, New York, Scientific and Cultural Conference for World Peace, March 2 [25]–27, 1949

France, Paris, World Congress of Partisans of Peace, April 20–25, 1949

Mexico, Mexico City, All-American Continental Congress for Peace and Democracy, Sept. 5–10, 1949

In addition, national “Peace” meetings have been held in France, (Nov. 1948), Uruguay (Dec. 1948); Korea and Rumania (March, 1949), Bulgaria and Japan (April, 1949), Canada (May, 1949), Great Britain and Hungary, (June, 1949); Chile, (July, 1949) Cuba, Uruguay and USSR (August, 1949), Poland (Sept. 1949) and the United Kingdom (Oct. 1949).

Peace “weeks” have been scheduled in France, Sweden, Norway and Czechoslovakia for September and in Finland and Denmark for October, 1949. In Germany, September 1 was designated as a “Day of Peace” and the communists devoted the entire month to the peace theme. The Permanent Committee also called for world-wide observance on October 2 of “International Day for the struggle for Peace.” International Peace Day was celebrated in Western Europe by distribution among workers of handbills viciously attacking the Marshall Plan and the North Atlantic Pact. Peace Congresses invariably conclude with appeals for active work in the interest of “peace” by “all democratic and peace-loving organizations.” Thus, trade unions, women’s organizations, youth and peasant associations, cooperatives, learned professional and other front-page organizations are being utilized increasingly as transmission belts in the propaganda campaign. At the Second Congress of the World Federation of Trade Unions, held July, 1949 in Milan, Italy, a major political activity of trade unions was described as support of the Soviet struggle for peace on an international and national scale. National trade unions were instructed to take a most active part in the work of the national committees for peace and to set up committees for peace in shops and factories and to propagandize for peace within the trade unions.

More recently, the following major conferences emphasizing the “peace” theme have been scheduled:

Council of the International Federation of Democratic Women—Moscow—Nov. 15

Congress of the Women’s International Democratic Federation—Peiping—Dec. 1–7

World Democratic Youth Week—Nov. 10–17

World Congress for Human Rights—Prague—November

All India Youth Congress—Delhi

World Federation of Trade Unions—Asia—Nov. 15–22

All India Congress of the Partisans of Peace—November

Congress of the International Organization of Journalists—Brussels—Dec. 5–7

Madison Square Garden Mobilization for Peace—New York, Dec. 5.

1. Techniques Utilized at “Peace Conference.”

During the last twenty five years the Communists have had considerable experience in using international gatherings as sounding boards for Soviet propaganda. From establishment and manipulation of front organizations has crystallized a body of techniques which communists utilize with much effectiveness.

a. Concealment of Sponsorship

To obtain support for communist objectives from groups which are generally not in sympathy with communist goals, great efforts are made to associate liberalism and progressivism with the peace congresses in the minds of the public. The names of non-communist adherents are publicized (in Western countries) while the support of communists are generally kept quiet. Review of the Congress’ sponsors, however, shows the extent of the influence exerted by communists and fellow travellers.…

b. Tight Control of Proceedings

While asserting that peace conferences are essentially liberal in character, communists effectively dominate them by pushing through their agenda, their rules, their chosen officials (particularly the Secretary-General) without permitting delegates time to propose alternatives. By foresight and persistence, communists pack the important drafting committee. Working as an organized and well-disciplined minority, they ride rough-shod over the rules of the meeting.…

By such tight control of proceedings of gatherings said to be objective, the communists are able to ensure unobstructed confirmation of the Soviet message: the USSR desires peace, the US wants war.

c. Fiction of Mass Support

Extravagant claims are made concerning the degree of support attaching to the stated objectives of the peace congresses. The Paris congress, for example, was said to represent 72 nations and 800,000,000 people—or slightly more than one-third of the total world population including infants. This figure presumably was based upon membership of all groups invited or interested. Allowing for such practices as multiple counting of individuals belonging to several of the organizations included and inflation of membership figures of each, that figure is completely out of line with the membership of participating organizations.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

d. Exploitation of Intellectuals

Intellectuals are mobilized in part to sustain the myth, that all intellectuals worthy of the name acknowledge the superiority of Marxist logic and view with sympathy the elaboration of the “Great Socialist Experiment.” …

Outstanding leaders in the realm of the arts and sciences are also exploited as (1) experts, concerned with the vital problems of our age, who are expected to be aware of the nature and meaning of actual problems, and (2) as disinterested men of integrity engaged in probing for objective truth.…

e. Propagation of the Soviet Myth

While “peace” is the main subject of discussion at these Congresses, considerable time is devoted to propagation of the Soviet myth and other concepts sustaining that myth.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

The overall Soviet myth may be summed up roughly as follows:—

1. The Soviet Union represents the interests of the working people. It is the sole fatherland of the international proletariat; the base of the universal movement of oppressed peoples (colonials) and classes.

2. Soviet power is utilized to further the ideals of liberalism, freedom and economic security. The Soviets are constructing a brave new world which will eliminate the evils of contemporary “capitalist” society. Much progress has already been made,—e.g., elimination of illiteracy and unemployment. (For the benefit of the more sophisticated, admission is here implied that actual progress may be slow. This, however, is justified with the argument that the USSR exists in a hostile world. This hostility compels the Soviet Union,—its back literally up against the wall—to concentrate its energies into specific channels and to utilize certain methods which would be unnecessary in a “friendly world.”)

3. The Soviet Union is the heir of the revolutionary Jacobin movement (in its romantic sense), serving the ideals of economic equality and social justice.

4. The Soviet Union, alone of all modern nations, has prohibited discrimination on the basis of race or color.

5. The Soviet Union represents the “wave of the future.” It is identified with all things “progressive.” (The Soviet Union is marching together with the forces of progress. As other nations “catch up” they will unavoidably establish similar institutions and practices.) Similarly, the several Communist parties are a legitimate part of the great movement of liberal reform.

6. All roads lead to communism. Historical trends are working in favor of Soviet objectives. The logic of events will inescapably produce the victory of Soviet ideals.

7. The reverse side of the myth asserts that “degenerate capitalism”—characterized by internal contradictions and social injustice—is on the verge of collapse.

The Soviet myth undoubtedly holds great attraction for large numbers of people living outside the area of effective Soviet control. (This is the only reasonable explanation for the considerable support which Soviet policies continue to enjoy in Western countries despite the manifest facts of post-war Soviet aggression.) Unhappily, this myth is subscribed to in greater or less degree also by individuals and groups who regard themselves as non-communist. Many of these, still influenced by the continuous and denigrating criticism of the “capitalist” system which has characterized cultural trends in the past thirty years, have lost perspective and are uncertain concerning the transcendant values of the Western democracies. (This may be due to the fact that liberalism spent a long time in basic alliance with communism with which it had little in common.)

[Here follow 10 pages of source text presenting principal themes in the Soviet propaganda line, various verbal perversions resorted to in Soviet propaganda, an outline of Soviet propaganda objectives, and a detailed resume of the points made in the “discussion” portion of this paper.]

recommendations

I. Short Range

On appropriate occasions and when news developments warrant,

A. Report statements made by responsible US officials setting forth US foreign policy objectives in terms of the pursuit of peace and the prevention of war through friendly collaboration with freedom-loving nations and the maintenance of adequate military strength providing the basis for collective resistance to aggression. Point out that it is practically impossible for governments—particularly one with a constitutional structure such as ours—responsive to the people, to wage wars of aggression.

B. Review the efforts of the US in the United Nations and elsewhere to further peace, security and freedom. Emphasize that the United States has based its foreign policy on the United Nations.

The United States believes in cooperation and is confident that peace can be achieved through the United Nations. Because of this belief the United States demobilized its armed forces and offered through the United Nations to share its atomic knowledge and turn over its entire atomic establishment to international control.

Emphasize the contributions to world peace not merely of the UN itself but also of its specialized agencies.

C. Call attention to the cooperation of the North Atlantic Pact countries with one another and the US in defense of peace and security. Point out that on the initiative of the United States that regional defense arrangement has been designed to foster not a single political system but a free association that embraces varying systems.

D. Show how international programs such as the Marshall Plan, NAP and MAP are contributing to the establishment of a constructive peace of freedom.

E. Point out that the sovereign nations of the New World have already made concrete achievements in the preservation of peace in the Western Hemisphere through the machinery of cooperation provided by the OAS. Emphasize that the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Asssistance, far from being a militaristic measure, is designed to insure defense of the Americas while keeping expenditures on armaments of each Latin American nation at a minimum.

F. List US acts evidencing desire for constructive cooperation with the Soviet Union and the Soviet response to these gestures.

G. Make clear that although in signing the charter of the United Nations the Soviet Union accepted a solemn obligation to refrain from using or threatening to use force against the political independence and territorial integrity of any State and to settle all disputes peacefully it has violated these obligations for national advantage; there obviously can be no peace so long as a great power uses or threatens to use force against other states.

H. Contrast Soviet deeds with Soviet peace propaganda assertions. Emphasize that there is no satisfactory substitute for fulfillment of obligations.

I. Compare the magnitude of Soviet armaments and the rapid militarization of satellite countries with Soviet propaganda declarations concerning the peaceful intentions of the Soviet Union.

J. Expose the fraudulence of comparisons in Soviet propaganda of military expenditures in Soviet and US budgets.

K. Juxtapose statements concerning the peaceful intentions of the USSR with news relating to intensification of Soviet pressures and Soviet threats of force aimed at destroying the political independence of Yugoslavia and at intimidating Turkey and Iran.

L. Summarize USSR and Cominform policy toward Greece.

M. Relate suppressions and purges in satellite countries to Soviet peace propaganda (Communist peace is the sort of peace that the USSR has brought to Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria and Rumania).

N. Recall the Soviet slogan of the indivisability of peace and contrast it with the class warfare currently waged on Kremlin instructions in the satellite states. Emphasize that respect for democratic liberties is an indispensable condition of peace as that term is understood in the Free World.

O. Ridicule upside-down language and verbal perversions of Soviet terminology.

P. Exploit slogans used by US representatives to the UN, Austin and Cohen;—“Lift your iron curtain and you will strengthen peace,” and “stop your civil warmongering.”

Q. Report fully news concerning formation and development of national or international anti-communist movements in defense of peace, such as the meeting of the World Society for Free Veterans held recently in Paris.

caution

It seems ridiculous that the US should find it necessary to defend its peaceful intentions in the face of the notorious fact that governments responsive to the people find it difficult to wage war even in defense of vital interest; let alone to embark on military adventures. Tone of output, therefore, should not be defensive in character. Ridicule is an effective weapon; it should be employed cautiously and only when appropriate.

II. With Respect to a Long Range Program to Explode the Soviet Myth.

In addition to H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O of above:

A. Exploit, in an effort to dispel misunderstandings and false assumptions on which the Soviet myth thrives, all available information documenting the discrepancies between Soviet myth and reality, theory and practice. Particular attention should be given to treatment of workers and religious bodies in the USSR and its satellites. (The Soviet Government jails workers who strike, quit their jobs, are absent or come late to work. It crushed trade unionism and established huge forced-labor camps. The Government actively pursues anti-Semitic policies, refuses to allow Jews who so desired to migrate to Palestine; abolished Jewish language newspapers, deported Jews with US or British relatives from the Ukraine to Siberia and created a ghetto in a desolate Siberian corner of the USSR from which Jews are forbidden to leave.) (To Moslem audiences stress the anti-Moslem activities of the USSR.)

The super-nationalistic chauvinistic character of Soviet domestic policy and propaganda as well as the abject subservience of world communist movements to the USSR should also be emphasized.

B. Explain how the Soviet economic system functions not for the benefit of the people and that the claims made for it are fraudulent. This should be documented fully with reliable, factual information.

C. Point out the true meaning of Soviet imperialism, emphasizing both political and economic aspects. For example, show that in the Far East Communist “liberation” means the imposition of Soviet domination and the destruction of national independence; in Europe communist governments Russify local institutions and make their countries completely available to Soviet economic spoliation.

D. Report fully news concerning disaffection—under the impact of Yugoslav-USSR controversy, religious persecution, staged trials, etc.—of prominent pro-Communist intellectuals. List names and quote from both American and foreign intellectuals, formerly pro-Soviet in their orientation, who have become disillusioned with Soviet practices.

E. Report factually reliable reports concerning splintering processes which may take place in the several Communist parties as a consequence of the Yugoslav-Soviet USSR controversy. Emphasize the implications of this controversy for the entire Communist world and the choice before Communists between loyalty to the interests of their own countries and submission to the dictates of a foreign power concerned only with its own national interests and ambitions.

F. Invite attention to Soviet abandonment of individuals and groups when such abandonment suits the immediate purpose of the USSR.

G. Cross report dwindling in membership of Communist parties and organizations, particularly in Western countries.

H. Whenever possible, utilize statements of recognized intellectuals exploding the Soviet myth and reaffirming the values of the Free World.

I. In affirming Western values, greater emphasis should be placed on:

1. relating the material achievements of democratic societies to the enlargement of facilities for self-development,

2. role of organized labor in the US as well as labor’s concrete achievements,

3. vertical mobility of US social structure,

4. juridical defense,

5. Significance of the right to opposition and the protection of minorities

6. constructive exploitation of the emotional loyalties of man to country, religion, family and local traditions.

7. common heritage; identification of American ideals with the European spirit (to Europe and to other areas where European traditions are strong). (To Asian countries report Western values in terms which encourage Asians more closely to associate with the West.)

8. conviction of the American people that freedom throughout the world accompanied by rising living standards are necessary to US security and welfare as well as world peace; and the constructive action of the US to build up insufficiently developed areas of the world,

9. respect and appreciation for the lasting achievements of other cultures,

10. US sympathy for and encouragement of attainment of national independence by colonial peoples prepared to assume the responsibilities of independent statehood,

11. Diversity and richness of life as contrasted with the deadening uniformity enforced on the people of the Soviet world,

12. Association of freedom with progress and of suppression—regardless of the alleged justification—with reaction.

J. Emphasize to India the validity of UN efforts for peace and point out the essentially violent nature of Soviet communism—particularly its dependence on violence as a means of achieving its ends. (A unique factor operating in India is Hindu veneration for peace and non-violence as method of life and means of achievement. This makes Indians particularly susceptible to the appeal of the “peace offensive.”)

K. Emphasize particularly to African and colonial audiences the advance made by the American Negro in the fields of legislation, labor, education and the arts.

L. All measures documenting the firm resolve of the US to strengthen the security of the free world and to preserve free institutions and democratic processes should be reported fully. (To Greece, Turkey, Iran and other peripheral countries it is useful periodically to indicate that the US actively opposes all concessions to Soviet expansionism and to all other Soviet drives designed to destroy the independence and integrity of free nations.)

III. With Respect to Soviet Sponsored “Peace” Congresses and Other Front Organizations Featuring the “Peace” Theme.

In general, media should not devote undue attention to the proceedings of these meetings. When major congresses are held, media should, briefly, and in a matter of fact tone, utilize responsible comment or other material.

A. pointing out unrepresentative character of meetings; listing names of established and recognized non-Communist intellectuals, etc., not invited to participate,

B. linking wherever possible, congress speakers with Communist and Communist-front organizations,

C. showing that no bonafide discussions take place,

D. indicating that the purposes served by these meetings have little popular support,

E. Intimating that world opinion, informed concerning the realities of Soviet deeds, will not be taken in by Soviet words,

F. emphasizing that the Western democracies have through actions demonstrated their desire for genuine peace,

G. Stressing failure of the Soviet Union to utilize the UN organization UNESCO, which seeks through its wide membership and affiliation with leading scientists and cultural leaders throughout the world, to develop a sound educational basis for peace.

1. This paper was circulated to the Under Secretary’s Meeting as document UM D–71, December 13, 1949. A brief covering memorandum By Carlisle H. Humelsine, Executive Director of the Secretariat, not printed, explained that this paper had been prepared in the Public Affairs area of the Department of State for the guidance of overseas information media and educational exchange activities in countering the Soviet “peace” offensive. The paper had been revised on the basis of the recommendations of the Public Information Committee of the Department of State, and suggestions of interested officers of the Department had been incorporated.

   This paper was considered at the Under Secretary’s Meeting of December 16; see infra.

2. For documentation on the May 1948 exchange of correspondence between the then Ambassador in the Soviet Union Walter Bedell Smith and Soviet Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Mikailovich Molotov, see Foreign Relations, 1948, vol. ii, pp. 845–874, passim.
3. Regarding the Wallace–Stalin exchange under reference here, see footnote 11 to telegram 701, March 19, from Moscow, p. 814.
4. The reference here is to resolution proposed by Soviet Foreign Minister Audrey Yanuaryevich Vyshinsky during an address to the United Nations General Assembly on September 23. For documentation on the resolution, see vol. ii, pp. 72 ff.
5. Regarding the meeting of the Communist Information Bureau in Hungary in November and the resolutions issuing therefrom, see telegram 3004, December 3, from Moscow, p. 39.
6. On September 23 President Truman announced that the United States possessed evidence that an atomic explosion had occurred in the Soviet Union. For the text of the President’s statement, see Department of State Bulletin, October 3, 1949, p. 487. For additional documentation on the announcement, see vol. i, pp. 537 ff.