740.00119 Council/9–2745
Memorandum of Conversation54
| Participants: | The Secretary |
| Mr. Dunn | |
| Mr. Bohlen | |
| Mr. Molotov | |
| Ambassador Gusev | |
| Mr. Pavlov | |
| Mr. Bevin | |
| Sir Alexander Cadogan | |
| Sir Archibald Clark Kerr | |
| Mr. Ivanov |
The Secretary said he had taken Mr. Molotov’s proposal of yesterday55 in regard to procedure and had made a few drafting changes and added an additional paragraph concerning the summoning of a conference. The Secretary handed Mr. Molotov a copy of his proposal. (Copy attached.56)
Mr. Molotov, after reading the proposal in translation, said that he thought the first part was acceptable but suggested that the last sentence of the first part be changed to conform with the Berlin decision.
The Secretary said he must make it plain that it was one proposal and that he could not agree to the first part without acceptance of the second.
Mr. Bevin said he wished to be quite clear on what was being proposed. He said there were two proposals, one from Mr. Molotov and one from Mr. Byrnes. He said his idea had been that the whole matter of broadening the terms of the Potsdam decision concerning the work of the Council should be referred to the three Heads of Government. He said he would find it hard to agree to any narrowing of the conditions of the September 11th agreement unless there was some clear indication that at future meetings the basis would be broadened, which he felt could only be done by the Heads of Government.
The Secretary pointed out that he felt the second half of the proposal concerning a conference was essential. He said that since we had started this conference on the basis of five members participating in the discussion of the peace treaties, to narrow it to three without some indication that at a future date provision would be made for wider participation of other nations would result in public reaction being very critical. He added that as it was some criticism had been directed against the Council because it was limited to five. He pointed out that at the proposed conference it would be entirely feasible for the five Ministers to meet as they are now meeting. He [Page 418] added that in the Berlin agreement it was stated that these treaties would be submitted to the United Nations. There were two ways of doing this: either through diplomatic channels or through a conference. He personally favored the latter course, since it would dispose of the matter once and for all.
Mr. Molotov said that he had no objection to considering the Secretary’s proposal, although the idea of a conference was new to him and he would have to consult his colleagues and his Government, since it was a very important question. He suggested that they dispose of the first part in regard to immediate procedure and consider the second.
The Secretary said he had no objection to considering the first part first, provided it was clearly understood that the suggestion about a conference was equally a part of a single proposal.
Mr. Bevin said that his personal reaction to the proposal was not too favorable. His Government had made it clear that they interpreted the Berlin decision differently from Mr. Molotov; that in their opinion the resolution of September 11 was entirely correct. He said he did not wish to hold up the work, but he would like some time to consider Mr. Byrnes’ proposal.
The Secretary again pointed out that we were required under the Berlin decision to submit these treaties to the United Nations.
Mr. Molotov questioned the interest which such States as Haiti and Nicaragua would have in these peace treaties, yet they would be included among the categories of States to be invited to the conference under Mr. Byrnes’ proposal.
After further discussion, it was agreed that Mr. Byrnes’ proposal would be studied by the three Foreign Ministers, who would meet again after the afternoon session of the Council.