proof. Instead, it abuses, by its perversion of language, the world's hope for peace and understanding, for an end to fear and threats. Against that abuse, I raise a solemn protest.

58. NOTE FROM THE AMERICAN EMBASSY AT MOSCOW TO THE SOVIET MINISTER OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS,' DECEMBER 22, 1950 2

1. The Embassy of the United States of America has the honor to acknowledge the receipt of the note of November 3, 1950, of the Soviet Minister of Foreign Affairs. This note enclosed the text of a declaration published in Prague October 22, 1950, and proposed a meeting of the Council of Foreign Ministers of the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and the U.S.S.R. to consider the question of the fulfillment of the clauses of the Potsdam Agreement regarding the demilitarization of Germany.

2. The United States Government has consistently abided by the principle set forth in the Charter of the United Nations that international problems should be settled by peaceful negotiations.

5

The United States Government takes this occasion to reaffirm its adherence to this principle. This is in full accord with the spirit of the recent General Assembly resolution supported by the United States Government which calls attention to the desirability of consultations which would help to allay existing international tensions. Far from having any aggressive intentions toward the Soviet Union, it is inspired by a genuine desire to put an end to the existing international tension and will spare no effort to achieve so highly desirable an end. It is prepared on the basis and in the manner set forth below to explore with the Soviet, British, and French Governments the possibility of finding a mutually acceptable basis for a meeting of the Foreign Ministers of the four countries.

3. The Government of the United States has studied with care the note of the Soviet Government of November 3, 1950. It has been obliged to note with regret that the basis proposed in this note is not such as to afford any prospect of a genuine settlement. The Soviet proposal to examine the question of the demilitarization of Germany will not suffice to remove the causes of the present tension. The only German military force which exists at present is that which for many months in the Soviet zone has been trained on military lines with artillery and tanks. If the participation of German units in the defense of western Germany is being discussed, it is solely because Soviet policy and actions have compelled the other nations

1 Andrei Y. Vyshinsky.

2 Department of State Bulletin, Jan. 1, 1951, pp. 11-12. The British and French Ambassadors in Moscow delivered similar notes to the Soviet Foreign Minister on the same day.

3 Ibid., p. 12.

♦ Documents on German Unity, vol. I (Frankfurt, 1951), pp. 158–161. Res. 377 C (V), Nov. 3, 1950; supra, pp. 187-192.

to examine all means of improving their security. Contrary to the entirely false allegations contained in the Prague communiqué, the United States Government in common with the Governments of France and the United Kingdom is determined never to permit at any time or in any circumstance western Germany to be used as a base for aggression. The United States Government has no feeling of confidence that the same is true of that part of Germany under Soviet occupation, in view of the rearmament taking place in eastern Germany referred to above.

4. It is furthermore impossible to envisage a just settlement of German problems on the basis of the Prague communiqué. This communiqué contains no new or constructive feature and the solution proposed therein has been rejected by the majority of German opinion. It does little more than reiterate in substance previous propositions which proved after exhaustive examination to afford no basis for a constructive solution of the German problem. For the purpose of ending the present division of Germany the United States Government in conjunction with the French and British Governments has for its part more than once made proposals for restoring German unity by means of free elections held under international supervision. These proposals were sent by letter by the three High Commissioners to the head of the Soviet Control Commission on May 25, 1950, and October 9, 1950.2 No reply has been made to these letters.

5. The serious tension which exists at present springs neither from the question of the demilitarization of Germany nor even from the German problem as a whole. It arises in the first instance from the general attitude adopted by the Government of the U.S.S.R. since the end of the war and from the consequent international developments of recent months. The Governments of the four powers would be failing in their full responsibility if they were to confine their discussion to the narrow basis proposed by the Soviet Government. Questions related to Germany and Austria would obviously be subjects for discussion. But the United States Government believes that any discussions should include equally the principal problems whose solution would permit a real and lasting improvement in the relations between the Soviet Union and the United States, Great Britain, and France and the elimination of the causes of present international tensions throughout the world.

6. The United States Government is prepared to designate a representative who, together with representatives of the Soviet, British, and French Governments would examine the problems referred to in the preceding paragraph with a view to finding a mutually acceptable basis for a meeting of the foreign ministers of the four countries and recommend to their Governments a suitable agenda. It would appear that the presence of representatives of the above-named governments at the seat of the United Nations in New

1 Supra, doc. 56.

Documents on German Unity, vol. I (Frankfurt, 1951), p. 157 (where the date of the letter is given as Oct. 10, 1950).

York presents the most convenient opportunity to conduct such exploratory discussions.

7. The United States Government would appreciate receiving the views of the Soviet Government concerning the proposals set forth in the present note.

1

59. NOTE FROM THE AMERICAN CHARGÉ D'AFFAIRES AT MOSCOW TO THE SOVIET FOREIGN MINISTER,2 JANUARY 23, 1951 3

4

The Chargé d'Affaires of the United States of America has the honor to acknowledge the receipt of the note of December 30, 1950 of the Soviet Minister of Foreign Affairs and, under instructions from his Government, to reply as follows:

The purpose of the United States Government is to seek to allay existing international tensions by discussing all problems likely to threaten world peace with a view to resolving the fundamental differences between nations. It therefore confines itself in this reply to a further examination of the question of the basis on which such negotiations might take place and refrains from refuting in detail the allegations on a number of points, especially in regard to Germany, which are made in the Soviet Government's note. As the United States Government has repeatedly pointed out, particularly in its note of December 22, 1950, these allegations are completely without foundation.

With regard to the substance of the Soviet Government's note, the United States Government observes that the Soviet Government does not object to a preliminary conference of representatives of the four governments but, in view of other statements in the note, the United States Government feels it necessary to ask for clarification in order to avoid any misunderstanding and to make it possible that such a preliminary conference should serve a useful purpose.

The United States Government in its note of December 22 stated that the Soviet proposal for a meeting of the Foreign Ministers confined to considering the demilitarization of Germany in the context of the so-called Praha Declaration was not acceptable for the reasons therein given. The note proposed specifically that a meeting of the Foreign Ministers should include in its discussions not only questions related to Austria and Germany but also the principal problems whose solution would permit a real and lasting improvement in the relations

1 Walworth Barbour.

2 Andrei Y. Vyshinsky.

3 Department of State Bulletin, Feb. 5, 1951, pp. 228-229. The British and French Embassies at Moscow delivered similar notes to the Soviet Foreign Ministry on the same date.

Ibid., Jan. 15, 1951, pp. 90–92.

5 Supra.

• Declaration of Oct. 21, 1950; Documents on German Unity, vol. I (Frankfurt, 1951), pp. 158-161.

between the Soviet Union and the United States, Great Britain, and France and the elimination of the causes of present international tensions throughout the world.

In its reply, the Soviet Government limited itself to an indication that it is willing to discuss questions concerning Germany. In this connection, the note of the Soviet Government refers again to the so-called Praha Declaration which the United States Government as well as the Governments of France and the United Kingdom have made clear they could in no circumstances accept as a limitation on or as a basis for discussions.

The note of the Soviet Government thus does not reveal whether that government agrees that a meeting of the Foreign Ministers of the four countries would deal with the other questions indicated in the note of the United States Government. The United States Government wishes to emphasize, as was stated in its note of December 22nd, that the tension which exists in the world today does not arise from the German problem. A discussion limited to the questions proposed by the Soviet Government would therefore be inadequate and unreal.

Consequently, the United States Government would be glad to know whether the Soviet Government does agree that those further questions and problems referred to above will be among those which the Foreign Ministers may discuss.

In its note of December 22, the United States Government further proposed that representatives of the four governments be designated to meet and examine the problems just referred to with a view to finding a mutually acceptable basis for a meeting of the Foreign Ministers of the four countries and recommending to their governments a suitable agenda.

In the view of the United States Government, these representatives would need to give some consideration to the questions and problems involved in order to determine their formulation for inclusion in the agenda as well as the order in which they would appear so that the mutually acceptable basis referred to could be established. It would not be the function of the representatives to attempt to arrive at solutions of the problems, this function being reserved for the Ministers themselves.

While the note of the Soviet Government states that it does not object to a preliminary conference of representatives of the four governments, it is not clear, in view of other statements in the note, whether the Soviet Government agrees that the function of such a preliminary conference should be as stated above. Consequently, the United States Government would be glad to know whether the view of the Soviet Government in this matter is the same as its own. As for the meeting place of the preliminary conference, the United States Government is prepared to agree on Paris.

The Government of the United States renews its proposal made on December 22 and hopes that the Soviet Government is prepared to discuss the elimination of the principal causes of present international tensions and that it will accordingly agree on the points mentioned

above. If the Soviet Government does agree, the United States Government for its part is ready to set, in agreement with the Governments of the United Kingdom, France, and the Soviet Union, the date of the exploratory meeting of representatives.

60. NOTE FROM THE AMERICAN AMBASSADOR AT MOSCOW1 TO THE SOVIET FOREIGN MINISTER,2 FEBRUARY 19, 1951 3

The Ambassador of the United States of America has the honor to acknowledge the receipt of the Soviet Government's note of February 5, 1951, and under instructions from his Government, to reply as follows:

The United States Government regrets that the Soviet Government in its reply repeats and further exaggerates inaccurate statements about the policies and motives of the United States, France, the United Kingdom as well as the German Federal Republic. The Soviet allegations are totally without foundation.

The attempt to eliminate the causes of international tension is a subject which so deeply touches the interests of all peoples that it demands the most serious and honest consideration. Clearly, if these causes are to be eliminated, they must first be correctly identified.

It is obvious that it is not the German problem or the consideration of a German contribution to the defense of Western Europe which lies at the root of the present tension. The United States Government wishes to emphasize, moreover, that in Western Germany there do not exist any German military forces, or any German war industry and that the only fait accompli in this field in Europe is the existence of the huge armaments maintained by the Soviet bloc which include forces raised in East Germany. In short, as the United States Government stated in its note of December 22 the serious tension which exists at present arises in the first instance from the general attitude adopted by the Government of the U.S.S.R. since the end of the war.

The Soviet Government has referred to the defense program undertaken by the United States and the free nations of Europe. It must be as apparent to the Soviet Government, as it is to world public opinion, that the free nations of the world, confronted with the vast armed forces maintained by the Soviet Union and the nations under its control and in the face of the frustration by the Soviet Government of the sincere efforts of a large majority of the members of the United Nations to obtain the effective international control and reduction of armaments, have had no course except to move to redress