Foreign Relations of the United States, 1964–1968, Volume XVII, Eastern Europe

139. Telegram From the Legation in Romania to the Department of State¹

Bucharest, February 26, 1964, 3 p.m.

573. Had cordial hour and half talk with Foreign Minister Manescu evening February 24. Discussion dealt mainly with Rumanian-American relations. Highlights follow:

1. Manescu’s relations with Secretary Rusk. Manescu spoke at length and with warm appreciation of their frank and useful discussions last fall² and hoped they would be resumed upon next annual visit to UNGA. However he did not want to let dialogue lapse until he next saw Secretary. For this reason he had asked see me and would like do so again from time to time. He would always be available for general discussions and could assure me as Bodnaras had recently done that “other top leaders will be equally accessible” should I wish to see them. I thanked Manescu and told him Secretary has spoken to me in same warm terms of his pleasure at their candid talks and his desire renew them whenever possible. I conveyed Secretary’s personal greetings and Manescu reciprocated. We agreed meet periodically for talks ourselves.

2. Visit of agricultural experts. Manescu said Secretary had told him to approach him directly if he had something special on his mind, and for this reason having received Moghioros’ urgent expression of interest in sending to U.S. four agricultural experts for observation of practical farm work, he had sent Minister Balaceanu to see Secretary personally about it. He said Rumanian Legation had meanwhile reported somewhat favorable reactions from Agriculture Department but nothing more concrete. I told him I had nothing to add but knew request (Department telegram 382)³ being given every possible consideration.

3. Presidents Kennedy and Johnson. Manescu spoke with great feeling about President Kennedy’s qualities as man and statesman and said Rumanians generally pleased and reassured by what they have observed of President Johnson’s approach to international problems. President Kennedy had introduced new tone and more objective approach to relations with Eastern Europe which continue very much in evidence. During his tenure Rumanian-American relations had much improved. Atmosphere still steadily improving and as example new tone he cited approvingly Secretary’s reply when recently asked whether certain countries could be regarded as “satellites” that his colleagues had advised that “socialist countries” better usage. Manescu thought perhaps he could take some credit for influencing Secretary’s views this regard. I observed that Rumania’s recent record of independent thought and action had unquestionably affected his thinking and Manescu laughingly assented.

4. Trade. I told Manescu that President Kennedy had been most interested in economic developments in Eastern Europe and its foreign trade, which were matters of pressing interest to Rumania, and that President had not only initiated review of our trade policy toward Eastern Europe generally but given impetus to special review policy toward Rumania. I elaborated somewhat upon his role this regard following Gheorghiu-Dej’s talk with Secretary Freeman and my talk with President last August.⁴ I told Manescu that as consequence these discussions, and as direct result Rumania’s stress over past year on “national independence and sovereignty” in pursuit its economic policy and other objectives, we had been drawing up revised trade policy for Eastern Europe and within its framework separate trade program for Rumania. I said two matters currently receiving jointly top-level consideration and Rumania only socialist country for which separate program now being envisaged. I said we plan invite Gaston-Marin; visit would give everyone fine opportunity for wide ranging talks. He said there are many urgent matters because of planning requirements and several “which President Gheorghiu-Dej singled out to Secretary Freeman are of particular urgency and importance” (i.e. synthetic rubber plants). He was glad note American del from International General Electric Company is now here and understands talks going well (group is negotiating possible $10 million deal for methane gas turbines).

5. Consular Cases. Manescu said he heard I had very interesting talk with Bodnaras and we had even discussed our consular cases. I said I was most gratified have Bodnaras assure me that all consular cases I raised with Manescu last May will eventually be resolved. Manescu said what Bodnaras told me was of course “authoritative” and he could now confirm they are “moving to resolve all cases I had raised in their totality.” He cited number of 372. I said that seemed go beyond 267 cases listed in my démarche. Manescu said 372 was figure he was given (presumably covers our 267 plus other family members) and action being taken “as matter of principle for humanitarian reasons.” I said this information highly gratifying and I knew how much it would be welcomed in Washington. I then raised question two Galdau boys who had not been allowed accompany their mother to join father. Manescu checked list, verified that case disapproved, but promised it will be reexamined. I thanked him and expressed hope same attitude will be adopted in cases of others not necessarily on our lists who also may desire join close relatives in U.S. Manescu said they will continue take same approach in such cases. (Indeed since November 1963, 11 relatives of American citizens plus 11 more members of their families have received exit documents even though not on Legation’s lists.)⁵

6. Level of missions. Manescu then raised question of level of missions which he reminded me had discussed with Secretary and asked for my views. I repeated what I told Malita as reported paragraph 1, Legtel 567,⁶ as well as what I proposed tell Manescu in numbered paragraph 4 of Legtel 556.⁷ I stressed as my personal view that once all consular cases were settled they would probably not have to wait long for our decision and therefore what he had just told me this regard was particularly relevant and would be carefully studied in Washington. I also emphasized we approached question in each of three Balkan countries in light of status of our individual relations with each country and would make separate decisions accordingly. Manescu agreed with this approach and expressed satisfaction with what I had say generally on subject.

I reminded Manescu there were other issues on which we also hoped see progress soon:

(1) Consular convention; we welcomed Rumania’s agreement conclude convention but were still waiting for their draft. Manescu said we will have it shortly and they will be prepared pursue talks in Washington.

(2) Travel restrictions. I said we were still awaiting Rumanian reply our note proposing mutual waiver travel notification requirement, with certain zones to be closed for travel in both countries.⁸ We considered proposal strictly reciprocal and its adoption would constitute further step toward improved relations. Manescu objected that our closed areas were proportionately much larger than theirs (spoke of third of American territory as compared with 2 percent Rumanian territory). I said I thought about third our territory was proscribed to Soviet travel on reciprocal basis but only 12 percent or so to Rumanian travel. I also believed Rumanian closed area including frontier zones was somewhat larger than he indicated. In fact I had been under impression American and Rumanian closed areas were roughly proportionate and suggested their experts might take another look at relative proportions. Manescu agreed do so. (Would appreciate Department doing same and advising me.)⁹ Manescu also objected our regulations made it hard for Rumanian Legation personnel to get to seashore. Perhaps most important was that we had charged them with acting on behalf of Russians, and they resented this because they acting on own behalf. I reminded him of Secretary’s words that sophisticated appraisal of situation was required. Manescu said matter might be worked out and they would give it further thought.

(3) New Chancery. I alerted Manescu we might be coming soon with formal request for assistance buy or build new Chancery. He said they had same problem in Washington with lovely Chancery but too small and impractical. They had thought of buying Cuban Embassy but problems arose and they now thinking of building new Chancery. We could discuss their desires and ours, and they would be prepared give us all possible aid here.

In conclusion Manescu philosophized about recent steady progress in our relations and observed Rumanian Government anticipates considerably expanded relations with U.S. in next several years. He repeated how much he values his personal relationship with Secretary Rusk and said some complimentary things about Legation’s role. He said that more you get to know us, more you will realize that though we are cautious—“because we have had series of foreign bosses throughout our history we have learned to be”—we are also self-respecting and speak out for ourselves and if we are treated well we respond in kind. I told him that Americans have long been nurtured in very qualities of self-respect and independent-mindedness of which he spoke and it is precisely these qualities we most respect in others and to which we have traditionally found it easiest to respond.

We agreed that talk was most useful and we will have other talks from time to time. Noteworthy that this talk held at Manescu’s own initiative. He could not have been more affable and fact he refrained from any reference to subject Department telegram 391¹⁰ underlines evident desire introduce no jarring note at this stage when more important developments pending in our relations. Manescu looked rested after two months absence but still under treatment for duodenal ulcer.

Full report by airgram.¹¹

Crawford

1. Source: Department of State, Central Files, POL RUM–US. Confidential.
2. A memorandum of their conversation is in Foreign Relations, 1961–1963, vol. XVI, Document 23.
3. Telegram 382, February 5, reported that the Government of Romania had requested permission to send four agricultural specialists to the United States for study purposes. (Department of State, Central Files, AGR 7 RUM)
4. Secretary of Agriculture Orville Freeman visited Romania August 3–5, 1963. The Legation reported on his visit in airgram A–41 from Bucharest, August 8, 1963. (Ibid., POL 2–1 RUM) Crawford arrived in Washington on August 7, 1963; his meeting with the President was not further identified.
5. In telegram 581 from Bucharest, February 29, Crawford reported that Manescu had assured him that Gheorghiu-Dej had authorized a quick resolution of all consular cases raised by the United States. (Ibid., POL RUM–US)
6. In telegram 567, February 21, Crawford reported that he told Malita that a settlement of the consular cases would bring quick U.S. action on raising the level of diplomatic missions. (Ibid.)
7. In telegram 556, February 15, Crawford reported that he would tell Manescu that raising the level of diplomatic representation between the two states should reflect a normalization of relations and that the only major issue between the two states was the question of exit visas for divided families. (Ibid.)
8. For text of the note, November 12, 1963, to the diplomatic missions in Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, and Romania, see Department of State Bulletin, December 2, 1963, p. 860.
9. In telegram 413 to Bucharest, February 27, the Department of State instructed the Legation to ask for a map outlining areas in which travel restrictions were imposed on U.S. diplomats, noting that such information had been provided to the Romanian Legation in the United States. (Department of State, Central Files, POL RUM–US)
10. Telegram 391 to Bucharest, February 13, reported on a U.S. grant of asylum to a Romanian diplomat and subsequent discussions with the Romanians regarding the defection. (Ibid., POL 30 RUM)
11. Airgram A–212 from Bucharest, February 28. (Ibid., POL 15–1 RUM)