Foreign Relations of the United States, 1969–1976, Volume XXIX, Eastern Europe; Eastern Mediterranean, 1969–1972

141. Memorandum of Conversation¹

Washington, December 11, 1970.

SUBJECT

• US Attitude towards Polish-FRG Treaty

PARTICIPANTS

• Jerzy Michalowski, Ambassador, Embassy of the Polish Peopleʼs Republic
• Richard T. Davies, Assistant Secretary, EUR
• John A. Baker, Jr., Director, EUR/CHP

Polish Ambassador Michalowski came in at the invitation of Mr. Davies who wished to clarify further for him the US attitude toward the signature of the FRG-Polish Treaty.² Mr. Davies observed that for the time being the Department of State would, if asked at press briefings, stick by its position of November 18, 1970, stated after the initialing of the Treaty (i.e., “The United States notes with satisfaction the initialling of a treaty between the Federal Republic of Germany and the Polish Peopleʼs Republic in Warsaw today. These negotiations have been the subject of consultations between the Federal Republic of Germany and the three Western powers who, with the Soviet Union, share continuing responsibilities for Germany. The United States is confident that this development will promote improved relations between Poland and the Federal Republic of Germany and help to eliminate sources of tension in Europe”).

If pressed to clarify this position, the spokesman would have to point out that the US maintained its rights for Germany as a whole up until a peace settlement and that such a settlement would involve the final establishment of the borders. We were not especially anxious to stress this, Mr. Davies said, and we knew it would not be welcomed by the Poles. We were being more forthcoming about the Treaty in our replies to specific written queries from the US public and Congressmen and would include the sentence: “The United States welcomes the treaty, including its border provisions, as a contribution to the improvement of German-Polish relations and to the elimination of sources of tension in Europe.”

Michalowski asked what we would do if such letters were published and Mr. Baker observed that normally the Departmentʼs clearance for publication would be sought. We would not exclude, however, that this might occur. We did not feel this would be particularly helpful as it could stimulate questioning of the spokesman and perhaps the type of clarification mentioned above.

Michalowski observed that there was disappointment in Poland that the US appeared not to welcome the Treaty and genuine puzzlement as to our reluctance not to accept (sic) the Treaty, border provisions included, as the British had (Michalowski later referred more accurately to the British use of “welcome” rather than accept). Michalowski further remarked that the US position appeared to lend encouragement to expellees and others in Germany who were resisting the Treaty. Mr. Davies asked whether the US stance was really causing that much concern in Poland, expressing doubt that this was the case. Michalowski referred to Polish concern for “forces in the US administration” who, he alleged, appeared interested in braking the FRGʼs Ostpolitik and were allegedly maintaining an unyielding position in the Berlin talks. He said he could not be sure that it would be possible to avoid criticism of the US in Poland unless a more forthcoming US public statement were made.

Mr. Baker observed that US media had given ample and favorable coverage to the signature of the Treaty and Chancellor Brandtʼs reception in Poland. There had been little pressure for an official US statement on the Treaty and the favorable atmosphere would be impaired if any controversy were to be raised about it.

Mr. Davies observed that we had considered the matter carefully and, for a number of reasons, felt it advisable to avoid if possible stirring up either proponents or opponents of a more forthcoming posture. Perhaps at a future time a clearer welcome would be possible. Until then, we expected our friends in Poland to avoid criticism in the knowledge that we were not concealing anything by our reserve.

While departing, Ambassador Michalowski remarked to Mr. Baker that there was a certain lack of clarity in the US handling of the matter. Mr. Baker admitted that this observation had validity, but added that a certain lack of clarity was at certain times preferable to too much clarity.

1. Source: National Archives, RG 59, Central Files 1970–73, POL 32–3 GER–POL. Limited Official Use. Drafted by Baker.
2. Michalowski met previously with Davies on December 5 to inquire about the U.S. attitude toward the treaty. Davies stated “that we plan in the near future to say in response to inquiries from our public that we welcome the treaty including the border provisions as a contribution to the lessening of tension in Europe.” In a subsequent conversation with Michalowski, Baker “said that, at the December 7 press briefing, the spokesman would stick to the substance of the statement made when the Treaty was initialled November 18…. The more forthcoming language will, however, emerge in due course as a result of its use in reply to public inquiries.” (Memorandum of conversation, December 5; ibid.) For the Departmentʼs statement of November 18, see Document 140.