768.5 MSP/1–553: Telegram
No. 666
The Ambassador in Yugoslavia (Allen) to the Department of State
niact
919. Department’s 835, December 31.1 Embassy concurs that unless notification to Tito of additional aid is accompanied by disclaimer, further grants at this time might be construed as condoning Tito’s recent actions and public statements. We have frequently stated that no political conditions were attached to our economic and military aid to Yugoslav Government. It is equally important to make it clear that no political approval is involved. Embassy believes present occasion is appropriate for plain spoken reiteration of these facts.
At same time, we should be certain that we are on firm ground in what we say re reasons for our aid. While humanitarian considerations [Page 1327] are always involved in American aid, Embassy does not believe these considerations are foremost in our aid to Yugoslavia and that it would be mistake to emphasize humanitarianism as chief basis for our help. Embassy believes primary reason for our aid is to strengthen Yugoslav ability to maintain its national independence against Cominform. Tito is above all a realist and understands this thoroughly. There is serious drought in Hungary but embarrassment to regime there does not cause us any concern.
Tone of Tito’s recent speeches has been bombastic. While his reference to “no help from US” referred to present drought and was adequately clarified following day, it was unhelpful and such statements should not be repeated. His reference to “another outcome” was foolish, and he should be made aware of US reaction. While indications in foreign press that it implied threat to return to Cominform are not correct, he was pointing out, in bravado fashion, that Yugoslavia would “go Italian” rather than be dictated to by either Moscow or West. Such boasting, while made chiefly for local consumption, is not conducive to improving US–Yugo relations and we should say so.
As re Ital-Yugo relations, Embassy doubts that tying national issue of this kind to economic aid is best method of obtaining favorable result. Certainly we should not refer to break with Vatican in connection with Ital-Yugo relations since Tito’s chief contention has always been that Vatican is identifiable with Italy and we would merely confirm his thesis. On question of fishing boats, see Embtel 916, January 5.2
We suggest that Tito and Popovic be informed (1) that our aid is not to be construed as implying approval of policies of Yugoslav regime, with particular reference to recent statements and acts, (2) that we expect generous public statement by Tito, without qualifications, expressing appreciation for this aid, (3) that international cooperation is a two-way street, and (4) that Americans are definitely not impressed by references to “other outcome”.