434. Telegram Supnu 319 From Geneva1
Supnu 319. Eyes only for Herter from Wadsworth.
I am somewhat disturbed by the tenor of certain newspaper stories concerning “Western agreement” with certain elements of the Soviet veto list, particularly as to possible congressional reaction to such stories. Luther Reid has tried hard to inculcate the correspondents here with the difference between the right of veto on the Control Commission and the acceptance of the necessity for unanimity in a few other parts of the treaty. However, the few stories to which I have reference make no distinction in this regard and give the impression that we have yielded to Soviet insistence on a whole series of vetoes in the Control Commission.
[Typeset Page 1589]I feel sure that Department is taking adequate measures to reassure certain key people on the Hill as to exactly what we have agreed to, but suggest that before too long it might be appropriate for Phil Farley to hold a background press conference in which these and other points might be made in order to clarify the U.S. position.
As can be seen from verbatims, both U.S. and U.K. delegations have been sparing no pains to make sure that Soviet distortions of the record on this are corrected immediately, and as of yesterday we received Tsarapkin’s assurance that he understood our position perfectly. This, of course, will not stop Soviet propagandists from making whatever hay they may wish to in broadcasts and articles emanating from Moscow, but I would like to feel that the appropriate people [Facsimile Page 2] in Washington know in advance that such propaganda is distorted and that we have not yielded a single principle in this veto business. As you know better than anyone, denial of a charge by a Senator is 100 times harder than obviating the necessity for the charge by giving him the full picture.
- Source: Expresses concern with news reports that U.S. and U.K. have agreed to Soviet veto list. Secret. 2 pp. NARA, RG 59, Central Files, 700.5611/3–559.↩