Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume XIV, Soviet Union

210. Memorandum of Conversation¹

Washington, March 23, 1967, 6 p.m.

SUBJECT

• Svetlana Alliluyeva

PARTICIPANTS

• Soviet Ambassador Anatoliy F. Dobrynin
• Deputy Under Secretary Foy D. Kohler

Ambassador Dobrynin called on me this evening, at his request, and made to me the following oral statement on the case of Svetlana Alliluyeva, replying to my statement to him² on the same matter:

“The assurances of the American side in connection with the case of S. Alliluyeva, relayed by Kohler, have produced a rather strange impression. The U.S. Government is trying to impress us with the idea that it was not implicated in the departure of Alliluyeva from India and that allegedly it in general is not interested in the whole affair, having a clear understanding of the undesirable consequences it could have for Soviet-American relations. Moreover, the fact that Alliluyeva has not come to the U.S.A. is portrayed almost as a friendly gesture by the U.S. Government toward the U.S.S.R.

“Meanwhile, it is completely clear, even from the information passed by Kohler, that it was American officials, including the American Ambassador to India, who organized the travel of Alliluyeva from New Delhi to Western Europe by the use of underhanded (nizkoprobnii) methods which could only be dictated by feelings of ill-will toward the State of which she is a citizen.

“Strictly speaking, we are not at all concerned here with the fact that Alliluyeva left India for some place or other. No one intended to prevent her from doing this. In what country or countries she is and how long she stays there is her personal affair. The attitude of the Soviet authorities toward this is clear from the very fact that she was given a visa for departure from the Soviet Union. Moreover, it has long been well-known that she is a person who is not completely sound (zdorovii) with pathological traits (elementi) which have been reflected in her general behaviour. Soviet authorities did not see any reason on the basis of this not to permit her to go abroad, but I am instructed to inform you of this aspect of the affair.

“But what cannot but surprise us are the above-mentioned activities of U.S. representatives, and, consequently, of the U.S. Government. These activities are saturated with a spirit of open unfriendliness toward our country and are in direct conflict with statements about striving for an improvement in U.S.-U.S.S.R. relations. Indeed, there are in Soviet-American relations many problems with which one might be occupied with much greater benefit for both sides than fussing over dubious business of such a kind.

“This is what we wished to say about this matter with complete frankness, having in mind that what we have said would be brought to the attention of President Johnson.

“It is of course for the American side to draw the appropriate conclusions from all of this. We do not intend to suggest (podskazivat) to [the American side]³ any sort of decisions on this score.”

At my request and only for my convenience in making an accurate report of the conversation, he left with me the attached copy of his talking notes in Russian.⁴

I told the Ambassador I took note of his statement. I regretted that the Soviet authorities had seen fit to take the unhelpful attitudes indicated therein. As the Ambassador knew, we had been frank and straightforward and had tried to handle this matter in a way designed to avoid creating obstacles to our relationship; we would continue to do so. Ambassador Dobrynin nodded in what seemed to be an expression of personal agreement but made no comment. The Ambassador did, however, refer to the TASS report of McCloskey’s press briefing which he said indicated the Department had approved in advance the issuance of a visa to Alliluyeva. I told him this was not true, and I thought it was unlikely that McCloskey could have said so. I had seen the statement he was to make to the press and it contained no such assertion.⁵

1. Source: National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1967–69, POL 30 USSR. Secret; Nodis.
2. See Document 206.
3. Brackets in the source text.
4. Not printed.
5. Note: In fact, McCloskey following his reading of the authorized statement on March 22, 1967 did state in reply to a question that Washington had authorized the issuance of the visa by New Delhi. This, of course, was not true. [Footnote in the source text.]