123–Barbour, Walworth
Memorandum of Conversation, by the Minister Counselor of the Embassy in the Soviet Union ( Barbour ) 1
Subjects: Unauthorized Showing of American Films; Operations of Burobin;2 Attitude of Soviet Consular Section; Shipment of Soviet Diplomatic Baggage from New York.
| Participants: | V.I. Bazykin, Chief, American Section Foreign Office. |
| Walworth Barbour, Minister-Counselor, American Embassy. |
I called on Mr. Bazykin at 3:00 o’clock on June 14 by appointment made at my request. The conversation lasted some forty minutes and may be summarized as follows:
Unauthorized Showing of American Films in Moscow:
I presented the Embassy’s Note No. 97 of June 14 and in informing Mr. Bazykin that the Note is self-explanatory, emphasized that it constituted a follow-up to three previous Embassy Notes of January 17, February 15 and April 10, to which no reply has been forthcoming.3 I stated that as the Soviets are aware, our protest in the matter of these films arises from the fact that they are American property, that no rights to release have ever been given the Soviet Union in connection therewith and that if, as indicated by superimposed sub-titles, they were obtained by capture from Germans in the recent war, such capture conveys no right to American property. I requested the Soviet authorities’ urgent consideration of the matter, replies to our communications and return of the films to the Embassy for their lawful owners. Mr. Bazykin replied that he would look into the matter and let me know.
Operations of Burobin:
I drew Mr. Bazykin’s attention to the status of Embassy relations with Burobin, informed him that Burobin’s attitude has become so uncooperative as to necessitate a strong Embassy protest and consideration of the effect thereof on the general question of the operation [Page 1603] of the diplomatic missions maintained by the United States in Moscow and reciprocally the Soviet Embassy in Washington. I said that I could understand a reasonable amount of inefficiency and the fact that such inefficiency might be compounded by the size of the organization. However, I noted that in recent weeks the Embassy has been unable even to get in touch with appropriate officials at Burobin to discuss and negotiate a number of important problems still pending, and the evident lack of cooperation thus demonstrated by Burobin could not be excused on any purely administrative ground. By way of example of the scope and nature of problems awaiting solution between Burobin and the Embassy, I outlined at considerable length the current position on the Embassy’s request for additional personnel, the situation in regard to labor contracts and the status of Tarasovka Dacha. We have for months had urgent need of chauffeurs, laborers, a gardener for Spasso, servants, etc., the absence of whom seriously handicaps the Embassy operation. Burobin has failed to supply such personnel, although requested repeatedly. I noted that there might be a connection between this attitude and the status of the labor contracts. While it is the United States Government’s position that a demand by a foreign government on a diplomatic mission to conclude labor contracts is an infringement of the diplomatic rights of the mission and while in fact Soviet employees of the Embassy enjoy greater benefits under United States employment policies than provided in the contract proposed by Burobin, the United States Government in an effort to assure that individuals employed by it enjoy wholly equitable treatment in accordance with their desires, had authorized the Embassy to conclude contracts somewhat modified in form but substantially providing the essential benefits contained in the Soviet proposal. We furnished a copy of such a revised draft contract to Burobin over a month ago and have since been endeavoring to negotiate agreement thereon, but have been unable to reach anybody in Burobin with whom to discuss the matter.
On Tarasovka Dacha, I stated that Burobin had indicated in May that the Dacha would no longer be available to the Embassy after September 30, that the Embassy is prepared to give it up at that time, provided suitable substitute quarters can be furnished, that, however, a matter of major importance in that connection is the payment for necessary repairs and renovation which must be completed before termination, and that Burobin’s agreement to designate an engineer to survey the premises with the Embassy engineer, with a view to establishing the repairs necessary, has not been carried out, although they accepted six weeks ago. I noted that an estimate in this regard amounting to some $15,000 and [Page 1604] made in 1950, is no longer valid, inasmuch as a number of the repairs included therein have been accomplished in the meantime.
Attitude of Soviet Consular Section:
I protested similarly the inaccessibility to the Embassy of officials of the Soviet Consular Section, noting that for many months it has been virtually impossible for the Embassy to reach anyone in the Consular Section to inquire concerning status of visa applications. I pointed out that the matter of the actual issuance of visas is subject to solution on a reciprocal basis but objected to the transparent maneuvers of the Soviet Consular Section officials in avoiding discussion of pending cases with appropriate Embassy officials. By way of example, I mentioned the case of Emory Armstrong, who is assigned to Moscow on a temporary detail to fill the gap resulting from the unavoidable departure of the Embassy Administrative Officer. Armstrong applied for a visa in Berlin on May 21, the Embassy requested the Foreign Office to expedite issuance in a Note of May 22. On May 25, I personally asked Vlasov, Chief of the Consular Section, to expedite, and on June 6, Ambassador Kirk similarly spoke to Acting Foreign Minister V. Zorin. Subsequently, the Embassy telephoned to Consular Section four times on June 12, twice on June 13 and nine times on June 14, but has not been able to reach anybody on any of these occasions.4
Shipment of Soviet Diplomatic Baggage from New York:
Mr. Bazykin raised again the issue of the seventeen cases of Soviet diplomatic baggage which was not loaded on the SS America recently. Referring to his conversations on May 295 with Embassy Counselor Cumming and the memorandum6 presented to Mr. Cumming at that time, he inquired concerning subsequent developments. I informed him that we had received nothing further from the Department in this connection but noted my understanding from previous documents that the Soviet Embassy in Washington has been kept fully advised of the situation. Mr. Bazykin requested a reply from the Embassy here and remarked that the Soviet authorities have not placed obstacles in the way of Embassy shipments. I agreed to endeavor to expedite information, but as regards shipments to this Embassy, I stated that while there has been relatively little difficulty in recent months, Mr. Bazykin would be [Page 1605] aware, or could inform himself from his Protocol Division concerning the numerous extraordinary difficulties experienced by the Embassy last winter, particularly in connection with shipments by rail from Helsinki, and pointed out that in at least two major respects, Soviet customs regulations themselves are inconsistent with accepted Diplomatic practice, namely the quota limits on Diplomatic imports and the requirement of customs inspection of imports not covered by laissez-passer.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, Mr. Bazykin agreed to inquire into the three subjects of my protest and I stated I would inform him concerning any developments in the matter of his Diplomatic baggage.
- Approved by Ambassador Kirk. Transmitted to the Department of State as an enclosure to despatch 753, from Moscow, June 19. In that despatch Barbour commented: “Whether any improvement in the situation will result from this conversation is problematical.”↩
- Section of the USSR Foreign Ministry responsible for services to foreigners.↩
- Text of the Embassy’s note of January 17, was released to the press by the Department of State on January 22; see Department of State Bulletin, February 5, 1951, pp. 229–230. The other notes are not printed.↩
- In his transmittal despatch (see footnote 1 above) Barbour reported that the Soviet Foreign Ministry authorized a visa for Armstrong the day following this conversation.↩
- Reported on in telegram 2038 from Moscow, May 30, not printed. (601.6111/5–3051)↩
- Copy of memorandum transmitted as enclosure to despatch 700 from Moscow, May 31, not printed. (601.6111/5–3151)↩