216. Memorandum of Conversation1
SUBJECT
- Case of Mrs. Svetlana Alliluyeva
PARTICIPANTS
- Mr. Yuri N. Tcherniakov, Soviet Chargé d’Affaires
- Mr. Foy D. Kohler, Deputy Under Secretary
The Soviet Chargé d’Affaires called on me at 5:30 this afternoon at his request. Referring to penciled notes from time to time, he made roughly the following statement with respect to the case of Mrs. Svetlana Alliluyeva.
He said that in the view of the Soviet Government, the actions of the United States Government in this case were hostile toward them and contrary to the statement which I had made on March 10 to Ambassador Dobrynin.2 In this connection, he referred to my statements at that time that we had trusted this case would not become an obstacle in relations between us, and had emphasized the President’s sincerity in seeking to follow the line of normalizing relations. He also repeated that I had then wanted Moscow to believe that the United States Government in no way had a direct interest in this matter and was not interested in bringing her to the United States. Continuing, he said the Soviet Government had taken note of these statements but that almost at once, we had started to act in a contrary manner.
He said that Mrs. Alliluyeva was not a normal person but that there were distinct signs of mental disturbances in spite of which she was actually being exploited for concrete and definite political purposes. The Soviet side could not ignore the fact that this exploitation was deliberately timed to coincide with the date of great importance in the history of the Soviet Union. The question, therefore, arose as to whether the United States Government realized that there are many other problems in which both sides could be more profitably engaged than in intriguing in a matter of this kind.
The Soviet side, he continued, would point out that there were in the Soviet Union a number of people who have been anxious to write about events relating to the death of the late President Kennedy, and yet they had been restrained and were not allowed to elaborate on certain [Page 489] theories and arguments. The Soviets had not been guided by opportunistic motives but by realization that such things do no good.
Incidentally, he said, the Soviet side was guided by the same motivations in connection with the observations of the Secretary of State about Soviet statements relating to American personalities including the President of the United States.
To speak frankly, he said, whatever might be said about freedom of expression and the like in connection with Svetlana Alliluyeva, the Soviet side understood that everything which would be stated or written by her or ascribed to her would be coached and endorsed by the American side. Besides this, the Soviets knew very well the mental and intellectual capacities of Mrs. Alliluyeva herself.
In saying all this straightforwardly, the Soviet side was not pretending to give advice or to make recommendations as to particular steps. This was the business of the American side. But naturally, it was quite another matter as to what reaction and what response would follow the actions of the American side in the Alliluyeva case, what emotions it could stir up in the Soviet Union, and what its influence would be on relations between our two countries which even without all this are already strained enough.
After hearing him out, I told Mr. Tcherniakov that I would like to make some immediate remarks in reply, reserving the right to make further reply after fully studying his statement and consulting my superiors. I said first of all I wanted to reject any charge or implication of United States Government involvement or exploitation of Mrs. Alliluyeva. I could assure him, and I wanted him to assure the Soviet Government that no American official, indeed no official or any Agency of the American Government had been in touch with Mrs. Alliluyeva since she arrived in Switzerland. There was no question whatsoever of any intrigue or any coaching, or any approval of anything she had said, or might say. Mr. Leddy had informed him, Mr. Tcherniakov, of the revalidation of a visitor’s visa to Mrs. Alliluyeva and of the fact that she was coming to this country. This was an action which we had taken in conformity with American laws and traditions.
During the time when she had been in Switzerland, she had had an opportunity to decide what she wanted to do and where she wanted to go, whether it was to any country in the world, or whether it was to return to the Soviet Union. She had decided that she wished to come to the United States and in accordance with our laws and traditions she had been given a visa to do so. In the circumstances, however, there had been no question of defection or asylum, and she was here on a visitor’s visa. She was completely free any day to go elsewhere or to return to the Soviet Union. She was in no sense in the custody or under the influence of the American Government or any agent or Agency of the American Government.
[Page 490]As to what she might say or write this was not only not under the control of the American Government, but could not be controlled by the American Government. Freedom of expression is embodied in our Constitution and even the President of the United States could not change this.
Incidentally, I added so far as the reported publication of her book was concerned, this would be the case even if she were not in the United States but still in the Soviet Union. If she had found a way to get her manuscript out as had Sinyavsky and Daniel, there was no way to prevent its publication in the United States even had we wished to do so.
Reviewing my own notes regarding this statement, I said that I failed to understand the reference to the death of President Kennedy and could not accept any parallel whatsoever between this and the question of Mrs. Alliluyeva. I could not conceive that anyone in the Soviet Union was in a position to contribute any information about the death of President Kennedy and that it would be very interesting if anyone were. So far as I knew the manuscript which Mrs. Alliluyeva would be having published not only in the United States but elsewhere concerned her own life and was written even before she left the Soviet Union having been brought out according to her own statement by “Indian friends”. We could not and would not object to any Soviet citizen publishing his own memoirs whether it was in the Soviet Union or outside the Soviet Union.
In this connection, I said that I wanted to confirm every word that I had previously said to Ambassador Dobrynin on this subject. Furthermore, the spirit in which this was said remained unchanged. So far as we were concerned, we had not even known that Mrs. Alliluyeva was outside the Soviet Union until the minute she walked in the American Embassy in New Delhi. We had in no way had anything to do with her appearance there and except for the immediate assistance in her departure from India had had no contact with her whatsoever. The United States Government had no interest in exploiting her or influencing her. She was strictly a private person and operating in a private capacity. We continued to hope that this case would not be made into an obstacle in the relationship between the two countries.
At the end, Mr. Tcherniakov asked a couple of questions, in reply to which I pointed out that the United States Government owned only one publishing house, while the Soviet Government owned all in the USSR. He then concluded by saying he was not in a position to add anything to the statement he had been instructed to make to me.
- Source: National Archives and Records Administration, RG 59, Central Files 1967–69, POL 30 USSR. Secret; Nodis.↩
- See Document 206.↩