860C.51/6–1446: Telegram
The Ambassador in Poland (Lane) to the Secretary of State
[Received June 21—12:07 p.m.]
888. Rajchman called on me evening June 12. He said he wished discuss our “unprecedented” action in suspending credits. In answer [Page 458] to my argument that not credits but merely deliveries had been suspended pending satisfactory fulfilment of conditions agreed upon in Washington, Rajchman was adamant that even the law firm of Covington Burling and Rublee had expressed desire to defend Polish point of view on ground that US Govt had defaulted on its agreement.
I told Rajchman that I had asked for audience with President Bierut 2 weeks ago and that as my instructions from Secretary Byrnes required my seeing the President, I did not believe it to be correct to discuss the situation beforehand with others in the Polish Govt. I said, however, that I would naturally be glad to discuss the situation in front of any persons whom President Bierut might have present at interview.
Rajchman said he thought it would be advisable for me first to discuss general situation with Modzelewski who would be familiar with various details and who would naturally be person to inform President. I repeated that I would be glad to discuss matter in presence of Modzelewski but that I insisted on seeing President. I said that I very much regretted delay in fixing appointment with President.
Rajchman said that our action in suspending (sic) credits had created very unfavorable effect in PSL and that Mikolajczyk was very antagonistic towards us as result. He said that our action had united public opinion and that all parties of Poland are now in agreement because of anti-American feeling. I said (with my tongue in my cheek) that I was delighted that we had been responsible for bringing political unity to Poland as this was one of basic policies of our Govt. I did not say to Rajchman, whose lack of reliability should now be clear to Dept, that Mikolajczyk had spoken in contrary sense with Keith in May and with me on June 11. Furthermore communiqué issued by Catholic Bishops at Czestochowa reported in mytel 875, June 12,60 indicates very contrary attitude on part of Polish people.
In reply to my complaint that Polish Govt had not furnished us with copies of texts of economic and financial treaties to which Poland is a party, Rajchman said that even though oral assurances may have been given in Washington by Polish representative on this subject I should know as a person with long diplomatic career that only written assurances are binding.
Rajchman said that he found as a result of our action in suspending (sic) credits that American people which had originally been hostile towards present Polish Govt was now taking attitude favorable thereto and in opposition Dept. I said that once facts were known about conditions in Poland, American people would fully understand position of US Govt and that I am in no way worried re reaction of [Page 459] American public. I felt it necessary to express this point of view because of Rajchman’s intimidating attitude.
I think that foregoing should be sufficiently clear as to attitude of Polish Govt as to require no comment on my part.
Sent Dept as 888, repeated Paris for Secretary Byrnes as 171, to London as 135, copy to Moscow via pouch.
- Not printed.↩